Delete debuginfo test suite infra for gdb without Rust support and lldb with Rust support
Implements https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/128953
I also deleted all the `min-lldb-version: 310` comments, because the oldest compatible distro I can find is Ubuntu 16.04 which ships lldb 3.8, though of course the package that the Ubuntu maintainers put together for that is broken.
Rocky Linux 8 amusingly ships lldb 17, even though it has a similar glibc and kernel version.
This PR is multiple highly mechanical changes. Some of the commits were created by just running `sed`. You may find it easier to review each commit separately.
Switch to using the v2 resolver in most workspaces
Pinning the resolver to v1 was done in 5abff3753a ("Explicit set workspace.resolver ...") in order to suppress warnings. Since there is no specific reason not to use the new resolver and since it fixes issues, change to `resolver = "2"` everywhere except library.
Include a copy of `compiler-rt` source in the `download-ci-llvm` tarball
This will make it possible to experiment with allowing `download-ci-llvm` builds to build `library/profiler_builtins`, without needing to check out the `src/llvm-project` submodule.
By itself, this PR just adds the files to the tarball, but doesn't actually do anything with them. The idea is that once this is merged, it will then be much easier to proceed with work on the necessary bootstrap changes (using the real downloaded tarball), without having to rig up weird hacks to simulate downloading a modified tarball.
---
Adding these files to the compressed tarballs appears to increase its size by a negligible amount (<1 MB out of 400/800+ MB).
The uncompressed size is about 14 MB (out of 2+ GB for the whole tarball).
(The excluded test files would have been another 35 MB.)
Update `crosstool-ng` for loongarch64
The current cross-compilation toolchain for the LoongArch64 target consists of GCC 13.2.0, Binutils 2.40, and Glibc 2.36. However, Binutils 2.40 has known issues that in broken binaries without any error reports:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/121289
- https://github.com/cross-rs/cross/issues/1538
This patch upgrades the cross-compilation toolchain for the LoongArch64 target to resolve these issues.
- GCC: 13.2.0 -> 14.2.0
- Binutils: 2.40 -> 2.42
The new binaries remain compatible with the existing GCC 13.2.0/Glibc 2.36 distribution, and no issues have been identified.
try-job: dist-loongarch64-linux
Stabilize `raw_ref_op` (RFC 2582)
This stabilizes the syntax `&raw const $expr` and `&raw mut $expr`. It has existed unstably for ~4 years now, and has been exposed on stable via the `addr_of` and `addr_of_mut` macros since Rust 1.51 (released more than 3 years ago). I think it has become clear that these operations are here to stay. So it is about time we give them proper primitive syntax. This has two advantages over the macro:
- Being macros, `addr_of`/`addr_of_mut` could in theory do arbitrary magic with the expression on which they work. The only "magic" they actually do is using the argument as a place expression rather than as a value expression. Place expressions are already a subtle topic and poorly understood by many programmers; having this hidden behind a macro using unstable language features makes this even worse. Conversely, people do have an idea of what happens below `&`/`&mut`, so we can make the subtle topic a lot more approachable by connecting to existing intuition.
- The name `addr_of` is quite unfortunate from today's perspective, given that we have accepted provenance as a reality, which means that a pointer is *not* just an address. Strict provenance has a method, `addr`, which extracts the address of a pointer; using the term `addr` in two different ways is quite unfortunate. That's why this PR soft-deprecates `addr_of` -- we will wait a long time before actually showing any warning here, but we should start telling people that the "addr" part of this name is somewhat misleading, and `&raw` avoids that potential confusion.
In summary, this syntax improves developers' ability to conceptualize the operational semantics of Rust, while making a fundamental operation frequently used in unsafe code feel properly built in.
Possible questions to consider, based on the RFC and [this](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/64490#issuecomment-1163802912) great summary by `@CAD97:`
- Some questions are entirely about the semantics. The semantics are the same as with the macros so I don't think this should have any impact on this syntax PR. Still, for completeness' sake:
- Should `&raw const *mut_ref` give a read-only pointer?
- Tracked at: https://github.com/rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/257
- I think ideally the answer is "no". Stacked Borrows says that pointer is read-only, but Tree Borrows says it is mutable.
- What exactly does `&raw const (*ptr).field` require? Answered in [the reference](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/reference/behavior-considered-undefined.html): the arithmetic to compute the field offset follows the rules of `ptr::offset`, making it UB if it goes out-of-bounds. Making this a safe operation (using `wrapping_offset` rules) is considered too much of a loss for alias analysis.
- Choose a different syntax? I don't want to re-litigate the RFC. The only credible alternative that has been proposed is `&raw $place` instead of `&raw const $place`, which (IIUC) could be achieved by making `raw` a contextual keyword in a new edition. The type is named `*const T`, so the explicit `const` is consistent in that regard. `&raw expr` lacks the explicit indication of immutability. However, `&raw const expr` is quite a but longer than `addr_of!(expr)`.
- Shouldn't we have a completely new, better raw pointer type instead? Yes we all want to see that happen -- but I don't think we should block stabilization on that, given that such a nicer type is not on the horizon currently and given the issues with `addr_of!` mentioned above. (If we keep the `&raw $place` syntax free for this, we could use it in the future for that new type.)
- What about the lint the RFC talked about? It hasn't been implemented yet. Given that the problematic code is UB with or without this stabilization, I don't think the lack of the lint should block stabilization.
- I created an issue to track adding it: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/127724
- Other points from the "future possibilites of the RFC
- "Syntactic sugar" extension: this has not been implemented. I'd argue this is too confusing, we should stick to what the RFC suggested and if we want to do anything about such expressions, add the lint.
- Encouraging / requiring `&raw` in situations where references are often/definitely incorrect: this has been / is being implemented. On packed fields this already is a hard error, and for `static mut` a lint suggesting raw pointers is being rolled out.
- Lowering of casts: this has been implemented. (It's also an invisible implementation detail.)
- `offsetof` woes: we now have native `offset_of` so this is not relevant any more.
To be done before landing:
- [x] Suppress `unused_parens` lint around `&raw {const|mut}` expressions
- See bottom of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/127679#issuecomment-2264073752 for rationale
- Implementation: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/128782
- [ ] Update the Reference.
- https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/pull/1567
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/64490
cc `@rust-lang/lang` `@rust-lang/opsem`
try-job: x86_64-msvc
try-job: test-various
try-job: dist-various-1
try-job: armhf-gnu
try-job: aarch64-apple
Move ZST ABI handling to `rustc_target`
Currently, target specific handling of ZST function call ABI (specifically passing them indirectly instead of ignoring them) is handled in `rustc_ty_utils`, whereas all other target specific function call ABI handling is located in `rustc_target`. This PR moves the ZST handling to `rustc_target` so that all the target-specific function call ABI handling is in one place. In the process of doing so, this PR fixes#125850 by ensuring that ZST arguments are always correctly ignored in the x86-64 `"sysv64"` ABI; any code which would be affected by this fix would have ICEd before this PR. Tests are also added using `#[rustc_abi(debug)]` to ensure this behaviour does not regress.
Fixes#125850
Recent versions of wasm-tools are now Apache-2.0 or MIT or Apache-2.0
with the LLVM exception, rather than strictly Apache-2.0 with the LLVM
exception. The only component with the exception has moved to a new
dependency `wasi-preview1-component-adapter-provider`.
With the new resolver, a few dependencies get brought in twice with
different licenses. For example, all dependencies from `wasm-tools`
gained Apache-2.0 and MIT options, and with the v2 resolver we were
using one version from before and one version from after this change.
This made tidy's license check difficult.
Update some minimum versions to remove duplicate dependencies and smooth
out license checking.
Pinning the resolver to v1 was done in 5abff3753a ("Explicit set
workspace.resolver ...") in order to suppress warnings. Since there is
no specific reason not to use the new resolver and since it fixes
issues, change to `resolver = "2"` everywhere except library and
submodules.
Promote Mac Catalyst targets to Tier 2, and ship with rustup
Promote the Mac Catalyst targets `x86_64-apple-ios-macabi` and `aarch64-apple-ios-macabi` to Tier 2, as per [the MCP](https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/761) (see that for motivation and details).
These targets are now also distributed with rustup, although without the sanitizer runtime, as that currently has trouble building, see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/129069.
Stabilize `unsafe_attributes`
# Stabilization report
## Summary
This is a tracking issue for the RFC 3325: unsafe attributes
We are stabilizing `#![feature(unsafe_attributes)]`, which makes certain attributes considered 'unsafe', meaning that they must be surrounded by an `unsafe(...)`, as in `#[unsafe(no_mangle)]`.
RFC: rust-lang/rfcs#3325
Tracking issue: #123757
## What is stabilized
### Summary of stabilization
Certain attributes will now be designated as unsafe attributes, namely, `no_mangle`, `export_name`, and `link_section` (stable only), and these attributes will need to be called by surrounding them in `unsafe(...)` syntax. On editions prior to 2024, this is simply an edition lint, but it will become a hard error in 2024. This also works in `cfg_attr`, but `unsafe` is not allowed for any other attributes, including proc-macros ones.
```rust
#[unsafe(no_mangle)]
fn a() {}
#[cfg_attr(any(), unsafe(export_name = "c"))]
fn b() {}
```
For a table showing the attributes that were considered to be included in the list to require unsafe, and subsequent reasoning about why each such attribute was or was not included, see [this comment here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/124214#issuecomment-2124753464)
## Tests
The relevant tests are in `tests/ui/rust-2024/unsafe-attributes` and `tests/ui/attributes/unsafe`.
Use `FnSig` instead of raw `FnDecl` for `ForeignItemKind::Fn`, fix ICE for `Fn` trait error on safe foreign fn
Let's use `hir::FnSig` instead of `hir::FnDecl + hir::Safety` for `ForeignItemKind::Fn`. This consolidates some handling code between normal fns and foreign fns.
Separetly, fix an ICE where we weren't handling `Fn` trait errors for safe foreign fns.
If perf is bad for the first commit, I can rework the ICE fix to not rely on it. But if perf is good, I prefer we fix and clean up things all at once 👍
r? spastorino
Fixes#128764
Remove useless attributes in merged doctest generated code
I took another look at the generated code for merged doctests and it seems like those attributes are only useful when running `rustc --test`, which isn't the case for merged doctests. Less code generated. \o/
r? `@notriddle`
rustdoc-json: Clean up serialization and printing.
Somewhat a followup to #128963, but makes sense regardless.
- Renames `out_path` to `out_dir` because it's not the path to the JSON, but the directory
- Also adds a comment explaining `None`
- Renames `write` to `serialize_and_write` because it does both.
- Also renames the self-profile activity name to be clear this measures both IO cost and serialization CPU cost
- Expands the timer to cover flushing
- Renames `output` to `output_crate`, to emphasize it's the contents, not the `--output` flag.
r? `@GuillaumeGomez`
epoll test: further clean up check_epoll_wait
Given that `check_epoll_wait` compared the length of the two slices, I don't think it was possible for it to ever return `false`. It's also strange to have some requirements checked inside the function and some checked by the caller, so let's just move it all inside the function.
Cc `@tiif` -- did I miss anything?
add 'project' process guidlines for larger contributions
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/3443
I am honestly not entirely sure what the consensus from what issue was. I feel like the epoll PR worked reasonably well, and not having been closely involved I am not sure which process `@oli-obk` followed there. Compared to the first draft in #3443 I tried to make this less formal and framed more as guidelines than hard rules.
