Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #132259 (rustc_codegen_llvm: Add a new 'pc' option to branch-protection)
- #132409 (CI: switch 7 linux jobs to free runners)
- #132498 (Suggest fixing typos and let bindings at the same time)
- #132524 (chore(style): sync submodule exclusion list between tidy and rustfmt)
- #132567 (Properly suggest `E::assoc` when we encounter `E::Variant::assoc`)
- #132571 (add const_eval_select macro to reduce redundancy)
- #132637 (Do not filter empty lint passes & re-do CTFE pass)
- #132642 (Add documentation on `ast::Attribute`)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Add documentation on `ast::Attribute`
I was working again with attributes in clippy recently and I often find myself in need to read the source code to ensure it's doing what I want.
Instead, a bit of documentation would allow me (and hopefully others) to skip this step.
Do not filter empty lint passes & re-do CTFE pass
Some structs implement `LintPass` without having a `Lint` associated with them #125116 broke that behaviour by filtering them out. This PR ensures that lintless passes are not filtered out.
Properly suggest `E::assoc` when we encounter `E::Variant::assoc`
Use the right span when encountering an enum variant followed by an associated item so we don't lose the associated item in the resulting code.
Do not suggest the thing twice, once as a removal of the associated item and a second time as a typo suggestion.
Suggest fixing typos and let bindings at the same time
Fixes#132483
Currently, a suggestion for adding a let binding won't be shown if we suggest fixing a typo. This changes that behavior to always show both, if possible. Essentially, this turns the suggestion from
```rust
error[E0425]: cannot find value `x2` in this scope
--> src/main.rs:4:5
|
4 | x2 = 2;
| ^^ help: a local variable with a similar name exists: `x1`
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0425`.
```
to
```rust
error[E0425]: cannot find value `x2` in this scope
--> src/main.rs:4:5
|
4 | x2 = 2;
| ^^
|
help: a local variable with a similar name exists
|
4 | x1 = 2;
| ~~
help: you might have meant to introduce a new binding
|
4 | let x2 = 2;
| +++
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0425`.
```
for the following code:
```rust
fn main() {
let x1 = 1;
x2 = 2;
}
```
The original behavior only shows the suggestion for a let binding if a typo suggestion wasn't already displayed. However, this falls apart in the cases like the one above where we have multiple similar variables. I don't think it makes sense to hide this suggestion if there's a similar variable, since that defeats the purpose of this suggestion in that case (it's meant to help those coming from languages like Python).
rustc_codegen_llvm: Add a new 'pc' option to branch-protection
Add a new 'pc' option to -Z branch-protection for aarch64 that enables the use of PC as a diversifier in PAC branch protection code.
When the pauth-lr target feature is enabled in combination with -Z branch-protection=pac-ret,pc, the new 9.5-a instructions (pacibsppc, retaasppc, etc) will be generated.
mark some target features as 'forbidden' so they cannot be (un)set with -Ctarget-feature
The context for this is https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116344: some target features change the way floats are passed between functions. Changing those target features is unsound as code compiled for the same target may now use different ABIs.
So this introduces a new concept of "forbidden" target features (on top of the existing "stable " and "unstable" categories), and makes it a hard error to (un)set such a target feature. For now, the x86 and ARM feature `soft-float` is on that list. We'll have to make some effort to collect more relevant features, and similar features from other targets, but that can happen after the basic infrastructure for this landed. (These features are being collected in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131799.)
I've made this a warning for now to give people some time to speak up if this would break something.
MCP: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/780
PassWrapper: adapt for new parameter in LLVM
llvm/llvm-project@390300d9f4 added a new parameter to some callbacks, so we have to handle them.
`@rustbot` label: +llvm-main
Remove unnecessary pub enum glob-imports from `rustc_middle::ty`
We used to have an idiom in the compiler where we'd prefix or suffix all the variants of an enum, for example `BoundRegionKind`, with something like `Br`, and then *glob-import* that enum variant directly.
`@noratrieb` brought this up, and I think that it's easier to read when we just use the normal style `EnumName::Variant`.
This PR is a bit large, but it's just naming.
The only somewhat opinionated change that this PR does is rename `BorrowKind::Imm` to `BorrowKind::Immutable` and same for the other variants. I think these enums are used sparingly enough that the extra length is fine.
r? `@noratrieb` or reassign
Revert "Avoid nested replacement ranges" from #129346.
It caused a test regression in the `cfg_eval.rs` crate. (The bugfix in #129346 was in a different commit; this commit was just a code simplification.)
r? `@petrochenkov`
remove support for extern-block const intrinsics
This converts all const-callable intrinsics into the "new" form of a regular `fn` with `#[rustc_intrinsic]` attribute. That simplifies some of the logic since those functions can be marked `const fn` like regular functions, so intrinsics no longer need a special case to be considered const-callable at all.
I also added a new attribute `#[rustc_const_stable_intrinsic]` to mark an intrinsic as being ready to be exposed on stable. Previously we used the `#[rustc_const_stable_indirect]` attribute for that, but that attribute had a dual role -- when used on a regular function, it is an entirely safe marker to make this function part of recursive const stability, but on an intrinsic it is a trusted marker requiring special care. It's not great for the same attribute to be sometimes fully checked and safe, and sometimes trusted and requiring special care, so I split this into two attributes.
This also fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/122652 by accepting intrinsics as const-stable if they have a fallback body that is recursively const-stable.
The library changes are best reviewed with whitespace hidden.
r? `@compiler-errors`
Support clobber_abi and vector registers (clobber-only) in PowerPC inline assembly
This supports `clobber_abi` which is one of the requirements of stabilization mentioned in #93335.
This basically does a similar thing I did in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/130630 to implement `clobber_abi` for s390x, but for powerpc/powerpc64/powerpc64le.
- This also supports vector registers (as `vreg`) as clobber-only, which need to support clobbering of them to implement `clobber_abi`.
- `vreg` should be able to accept `#[repr(simd)]` types as input/output if the unstable `altivec` target feature is enabled, but `core::arch::{powerpc,powerpc64}` vector types, `#[repr(simd)]`, and `core::simd` are all unstable, so the fact that this is currently a clobber-only should not be considered a blocker of clobber_abi implementation or stabilization. So I have not implemented it in this PR.
- See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131551 (which is based on this PR) for a PR to implement this.
- (I'm not sticking to whether that PR should be a separate PR or part of this PR, so I can merge that PR into this PR if needed.)
Refs:
- PPC32 SysV: Section "Function Calling Sequence" in [System V Application Binary Interface PowerPC Processor Supplement](https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/elf/elfspec_ppc.pdf)
- PPC64 ELFv1: Section 3.2 "Function Calling Sequence" in [64-bit PowerPC ELF Application Binary Interface Supplement](https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/ELF/ppc64/PPC-elf64abi.html#FUNC-CALL)
- PPC64 ELFv2: Section 2.2 "Function Calling Sequence" in [64-Bit ELF V2 ABI Specification](https://openpowerfoundation.org/specifications/64bitelfabi/)
- AIX: [Register usage and conventions](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=overview-register-usage-conventions), [Special registers in the PowerPC®](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=overview-special-registers-in-powerpc), [AIX vector programming](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=concepts-aix-vector-programming)
- Register definition in LLVM: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/llvmorg-19.1.0/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCRegisterInfo.td#L189
If I understand the above four ABI documentations correctly, except for the PPC32 SysV's VR (Vector Registers) and 32-bit AIX (currently not supported by rustc)'s r13, there does not appear to be important differences in terms of implementing `clobber_abi`:
- The above four ABIs are consistent about FPR (0-13: volatile, 14-31: nonvolatile), CR (0-1,5-7: volatile, 2-4: nonvolatile), XER (volatile), and CTR (volatile).
- As for GPR, only the registers we are treating as reserved are slightly different
- r0, r3-r12 are volatile
- r1(sp, reserved), r14-31 are nonvolatile
- r2(reserved) is TOC pointer in PPC64 ELF/AIX, system-reserved register in PPC32 SysV (AFAIK used as thread pointer in Linux/BSDs)
- r13(reserved for non-32-bit-AIX) is thread pointer in PPC64 ELF, small data area pointer register in PPC32 SysV, "reserved under 64-bit environment; not restored across system calls[^r13]" in AIX)
- As for FPSCR, volatile in PPC64 ELFv1/AIX, some fields are volatile only in certain situations (rest are volatile) in PPC32 SysV/PPC64 ELFv2.
- As for VR (Vector Registers), it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV, v0-v19 are volatile in both in PPC64 ELF/AIX, v20-v31 are nonvolatile in PPC64 ELF, reserved or nonvolatile depending on the ABI ([vec-extabi vs vec-default in LLVM](https://reviews.llvm.org/D89684), we are [using vec-extabi](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131341#discussion_r1797693299)) in AIX:
> When the default Vector enabled mode is used, these registers are reserved and must not be used.
> In the extended ABI vector enabled mode, these registers are nonvolatile and their values are preserved across function calls
I left [FIXME comment about PPC32 SysV](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131341#discussion_r1790496095) and added ABI check for AIX.
- As for VRSAVE, it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV, nonvolatile in PPC64 ELFv1, reserved in PPC64 ELFv2/AIX
- As for VSCR, it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV/PPC64 ELFv1, some fields are volatile only in certain situations (rest are volatile) in PPC64 ELFv2, volatile in AIX
We are currently treating r1-r2, r13 (non-32-bit-AIX), r29-r31, LR, CTR, and VRSAVE as reserved.
We are currently not processing anything about FPSCR and VSCR, but I feel those are things that should be processed by `preserves_flags` rather than `clobber_abi` if we need to do something about them. (However, PPCRegisterInfo.td in LLVM does not seem to define anything about them.)
Replaces #111335 and #124279
cc `@ecnelises` `@bzEq` `@lu-zero`
r? `@Amanieu`
`@rustbot` label +O-PowerPC +A-inline-assembly
[^r13]: callee-saved, according to [LLVM](6a6af0246b/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCCallingConv.td (L322)) and [GCC](a9173a50e7/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.h (L859)).
Suggest creating unary tuples when types don't match a trait
When you want to have a variadic function, a common workaround to implement this is to create a trait and then implement that trait for various tuples. For example in `pyo3` there exists
```rust
/// Calls the object with only positional arguments.
pub fn call1(&self, args: impl IntoPy<Py<PyTuple>>) -> PyResult<&PyAny> {
...
}
```
with various impls like
```rust
impl<A: IntoPy<PyObject> IntoPy<Py<PyAny>> for (A,)
impl<A: IntoPy<PyObject, B: IntoPy<PyObject> IntoPy<Py<PyAny>> for (A, B)
... etc
```
This means that if you want to call the method with a single item you have to create a unary tuple, like `(x,)`, rather than just `x`.
This PR implements a suggestion to do that, if applicable.
find the generic container rather than simply looking up for the assoc with const arg
Fixes#132534
This issue is caused by mismatched generic parameters. Previously, it tried to find `T` in `trait X`, but after this change, it will find `T` in `fn a`.
r? `@compiler-errors` as this assertion was introduced by you.
Use backticks instead of single quotes for library feature names in diagnostics
This PR changes the text of library feature errors for using unstable or body-unstable items. Displaying library feature names in backticks is consistent with other diagnostics (e.g. those from `rustc_passes`) and with the `reason`s on unstable attributes in the library. Additionally, this simplifies diagnostics when supporting multiple unstable attributes on items (see #131824) since `DiagSymbolList` also displays symbols using backticks.
Register `~const` preds for `Deref` adjustments in HIR typeck
This doesn't *do* anything yet, since `Deref` and `DerefMut` aren't constified, and we explicitly don't error on calling non-const trait methods in HIR yet -- presumably that will wait until std is re-constified. But I'm confident this logic is correct, and this (afaict?) is the only major hole left in enforcing `~const` in HIR typeck.
r? fee1-dead
- Store a mut ref to a `BorrowckDiags` in `MirBorrowckCtxt` instead of
owning it, to save having to pass ownership in and out of
`promoted_mbcx`.
- Use `buffer_error` in a couple of suitable places.
Because there is no real reason for it to be a separate struct.
- It has no methods.
- It's easy to confuse with the nearby `BorrowckInferContext` (which
does have methods).
- The `mut` ref to it in `TypeChecker` makes it seem like any of the
fields within might be mutable, but only two (`all_facts` and
`constraints`) actually are.
- Two of the fields are `pub(crate)` but can be private.
This change makes a lot of code more concise and readable.
It's strange to have a struct that contains a single anonymous field
that is an enum. This commit merges them. This does require increasing
the visibility of `TypeOfInfo` to `pub(crate)`, but that seems
worthwhile.
