`EvaluatedToUnknown` -> `EvaluatedToAmbigStackDependent`, `EvaluatedToRecur` -> `EvaluatedToErrStackDependent`
Less confusing names, since the only difference between them and their parallel `EvalutedTo..` is that they are stack dependent.
r? lcnr
Remove `PolyGenSig` since it's always a dummy binder
Coroutines are never polymorphic in their signature. This cleans up a FIXME in the code:
```
/// Returns the "coroutine signature", which consists of its yield
/// and return types.
///
/// N.B., some bits of the code prefers to see this wrapped in a
/// binder, but it never contains bound regions. Probably this
/// function should be removed.
```
Fix is_foreign_item for StableMIR instance
Change the implementation of `Instance::is_foreign_item` to directly query the compiler for the instance `def_id` instead of incorrectly relying on the conversion to `CrateItem`. I also added a method to check if the instance has body, since the function already existed and it just wasn't exposed via public APIs. This makes it much cheaper for the user to check if the instance has body.
## Background:
- In pull https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/118524, I fixed the conversion from Instance to CrateItem to avoid the conversion if the instance didn't have a body available. This broke the `is_foreign_item`.
r? `@ouz-a`
rustc_arena: add `alloc_str`
Two places called `from_utf8_unchecked` for strings from `alloc_slice`,
and one's SAFETY comment said this was for lack of `alloc_str` -- so
let's just add that instead!
Enforce `must_use` on associated types and RPITITs that have a must-use trait in bounds
Warn when an RPITIT or (un-normalized) associated type with a `#[must_use]` trait in its bounds is unused.
This is pending T-lang approval, since it changes the semantics of the `#[must_use]` attribute slightly, but I think it strictly catches more strange errors.
I could also limit this to just RPITITs, but that seems less useful.
Fixes#118444
tip for define macro name after `macro_rules!`
Fixes#118295
~Note that there are some bad case such as `macro_rules![]` or `macro_rules!()`. However, I think these are acceptable as they are likely to be seldom used (feel free to close this if you think its shortcomings outweigh its benefits)~
Edit: this problem was resolved by utilizing the `source_map.span_to_next_source`.
r? `@petrochenkov`
Suppress warnings in LLVM wrapper when targeting MSVC
The LLVM header files generate many warnings when compiled using MSVC. This makes it difficult to work on the LLVM wrapper code, because the warnings and errors that are relevant to local edits are obscured by the hundreds of lines of warnings from the LLVM Headers.
Use the glob binding in resolve_rustdoc_path process
Fixes#117920
Returning `None` seems enough.
I reproduces and tests this locally by `cargo +stage1 build`, but I cannot reproduce this ICE by putting [the following code](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=nightly&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=8b3ca8f4a7676eb90baf30437ba041a2) into `tests/ui/...` and then compiling it using `rustc +stage1 /path/to/test.rs` or `x.py test`:
```rust
#![crate_type = "lib"]
use super::Hasher;
/// [`Hasher`]
pub use core:#️⃣:*;
```
r? `@petrochenkov`
Change the implementation of `Instance::is_foreign_item` to directly
query the compiler for the instance `def_id` instead of incorrectly
relying on the conversion to `CrateItem`.
Background:
- In pull https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/118524, I fixed the
conversion from Instance to CrateItem to avoid the conversion if the
instance didn't have a body available. This broke the `is_foreign_item`.
docs: remove #110800 from release notes
It's not stable yet, and shouldn't be mentioned here. At least, the message shouldn't be written like this.
I realize it's weird to go through an FCP, and then have the feature remain unstable, but this was an unusual case.
Rustdoc used to silently swallow unknown language tokens on code blocks, and now it produces a compatibility warning. The FCP got everyone's sign-off on the warning, not the finished feature, which remains unstable.
add comment about keeping flags in sync between bootstrap.py and bootstrap.rs
They got out of sync, probably because this comment was missing on the Python side (it only exists on the Rust side). https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/118642 brings the flags back in sync but does not fix the comment, so let's do that here.
r? clubby789
Add ADT variant infomation to StableMIR and finish implementing TyKind::internal()
Introduce a `VariantDef` type and a mechanism to retrieve the definition from an `AdtDef`.
The `VariantDef` representation itself is just a combination of `AdtDef` and `VariantIdx`, which allow us to retrieve further information of a variant. I don't think we need to cache extra information for now, and we can translate on an on demand manner. I am leaving the fields public today due to https://github.com/rust-lang/project-stable-mir/issues/56, but they shouldn't. For this PR, I've only added a method to retrieve the variant name, and its fields. I also added an implementation of `RustcInternal` that allow users to retrieve more information using Rust internal APIs.
I have also finished the implementation of `RustcInternal` for `TyKind` which fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/project-stable-mir/issues/46.
## Motivation
Both of these changes are needed in order to properly interpret things like projections. For example,
- The variant definition is used to find out which variant we are downcasting to.
- Being able to create `Ty` from `TyKind` helps for example processing each stage of a projection, like the code in `place.ty()`.
`riscv32` platform support
This PR adds the following RISCV targets to the tier 2 list of targets:
- riscv32imafc-unknown-none-elf
- riscv32im-unknown-none-elf
The rationale behind adding them directly to tier 2, is that the other bare metal targets already exist at tier 2, and these new targets are the same with an additional target feature enabled.
As well as the additional targets, this PR fills out the platform support document(s) that were previously missing.
~~The RISC-V bare metal targets don't currently have a platform support document, but this will change soon as the RISC-V team from the Rust-embedded working group will maintain these once https://github.com/davidtwco/rust/pull/1 is merged (and `@davidtwco's` upstream PR is merged after). For the time being you can cc myself or any other member of the RISC-V team: https://github.com/orgs/rust-embedded/teams/riscv.~~
> A tier 2 target must have value to people other than its maintainers. (It may still be a niche target, but it must not be exclusively useful for an inherently closed group.)
RISC-V is an open specification, used and accessible to anyone including individuals.
> A tier 2 target must have a designated team of developers (the "target maintainers") available to consult on target-specific build-breaking issues, or if necessary to develop target-specific language or library implementation details. This team must have at least 2 developers.
This rust-embedded working group's [RISCV team](https://github.com/orgs/rust-embedded/teams/riscv) will maintain these targets.
> The target must not place undue burden on Rust developers not specifically concerned with that target. Rust developers are expected to not gratuitously break a tier 2 target, but are not expected to become experts in every tier 2 target, and are not expected to provide target-specific implementations for every tier 2 target.
I don't forsee this being an issue, the RISCV team will ensure we avoid undue burden for the general Rust community.
> The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how to build for the target using cross-compilation, and explaining how to run tests for the target. If at all possible, this documentation should show how to run Rust programs and tests for the target using emulation, to allow anyone to do so. If the target cannot be feasibly emulated, the documentation should explain how to obtain and work with physical hardware, cloud systems, or equivalent.
There are links to resources we maintain in the re wg org in the platform support document.
> The target must document its baseline expectations for the features or versions of CPUs, operating systems, libraries, runtime environments, and similar.
Documented in the platform support document.
> If introducing a new tier 2 or higher target that is identical to an existing Rust target except for the baseline expectations for the features or versions of CPUs, operating systems, libraries, runtime environments, and similar, then the proposed target must document to the satisfaction of the approving teams why the specific difference in baseline expectations provides sufficient value to justify a separate target.
New target features in RISCV can drastically change the capability of a CPU, hence the need for a separate target to support different variants. We aim to support any ratified RISCV extensions.
> Tier 2 targets must not leave any significant portions of core or the standard library unimplemented or stubbed out, unless they cannot possibly be supported on the target.
`core` is fully implemented.
> The code generation backend for the target should not have deficiencies that invalidate Rust safety properties, as evaluated by the Rust compiler team. (This requirement does not apply to arbitrary security enhancements or mitigations provided by code generation backends, only to those properties needed to ensure safe Rust code cannot cause undefined behavior or other unsoundness.) If this requirement does not hold, the target must clearly and prominently document any such limitations as part of the target's entry in the target tier list, and ideally also via a failing test in the testsuite. The Rust compiler team must be satisfied with the balance between these limitations and the difficulty of implementing the necessary features.
RISCV is a well-established and well-maintained LLVM backend. To the best of my knowledge, the backend won't cause the generated code to have undefined behaviour.
> If the target supports C code, and the target has an interoperable calling convention for C code, the Rust target must support that C calling convention for the platform via extern "C". The C calling convention does not need to be the default Rust calling convention for the target, however.
The C calling convention is supported by RISCV.
> The target must build reliably in CI, for all components that Rust's CI considers mandatory.
For the last 4-5 years many of these RISCV targets have been building in CI without any known issues.
> The approving teams may additionally require that a subset of tests pass in CI, such as enough to build a functional "hello world" program, ./x.py test --no-run, or equivalent "smoke tests". In particular, this requirement may apply if the target builds host tools, or if the tests in question provide substantial value via early detection of critical problems.
Not applicable, in the future we may wish to add qemu tests but this is out of scope for now.
> Building the target in CI must not take substantially longer than the current slowest target in CI, and should not substantially raise the maintenance burden of the CI infrastructure. This requirement is subjective, to be evaluated by the infrastructure team, and will take the community importance of the target into account.
To the best of my knowledge, this will not induce a burden on the current CI infra.
> Tier 2 targets should, if at all possible, support cross-compiling. Tier 2 targets should not require using the target as the host for builds, even if the target supports host tools.
Cross-compilation is supported and documented in the platform support document.
> In addition to the legal requirements for all targets (specified in the tier 3 requirements), because a tier 2 target typically involves the Rust project building and supplying various compiled binaries, incorporating the target and redistributing any resulting compiled binaries (e.g. built libraries, host tools if any) must not impose any onerous license requirements on any members of the Rust project, including infrastructure team members and those operating CI systems. This is a subjective requirement, to be evaluated by the approving teams.
There are no additional license issues to worry about.
> Tier 2 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or other developers in the community, to ensure that tests pass for the target. In particular, do not post comments (automated or manual) on a PR that derail or suggest a block on the PR based on tests failing for the target. Do not send automated messages or notifications (via any medium, including via `@)` to a PR author or others involved with a PR regarding the PR breaking tests on a tier 2 target, unless they have opted into such messages.
The RISCV team agrees not to do this.
> The target maintainers should regularly run the testsuite for the target, and should fix any test failures in a reasonably timely fashion.
The RISCV team will fix any issues in a timely manner.
Provide context when `?` can't be called because of `Result<_, E>`
When a method chain ending in `?` causes an E0277 because the expression's `Result::Err` variant doesn't have a type that can be converted to the `Result<_, E>` type parameter in the return type, provide additional context of which parts of the chain can and can't support the `?` operator.
```
error[E0277]: `?` couldn't convert the error to `String`
--> $DIR/question-mark-result-err-mismatch.rs:27:25
|
LL | fn bar() -> Result<(), String> {
| ------------------ expected `String` because of this
LL | let x = foo();
| ----- this has type `Result<_, String>`
...
LL | .map_err(|_| ())?;
| ---------------^ the trait `From<()>` is not implemented for `String`
| |
| this can't be annotated with `?` because it has type `Result<_, ()>`
|
= note: the question mark operation (`?`) implicitly performs a conversion on the error value using the `From` trait
= help: the following other types implement trait `From<T>`:
<String as From<char>>
<String as From<Box<str>>>
<String as From<Cow<'a, str>>>
<String as From<&str>>
<String as From<&mut str>>
<String as From<&String>>
= note: required for `Result<(), String>` to implement `FromResidual<Result<Infallible, ()>>`
```
Fix#72124.
Remove `#[rustc_host]`, use internal desugaring
Also removed a way for users to explicitly specify the host param since that isn't particularly useful. This should eliminate any pain with encoding attributes across crates and etc.
r? `@compiler-errors`
coverage: Be more strict about what counts as a "visible macro"
This is a follow-up to the workaround in #117827, and I believe it now properly fixes#117788.
The old code treats a span as having a “visible macro” if it is part of a macro-expansion, and its parent callsite's context is the same as the body span's context. But if the body span is itself part of an expansion, the macro in question might not actually be visible from the body span. That results in the macro name's length being meaningless as a span offset.
We now only consider spans whose parent callsite is the same as the source callsite, i.e. the parent has no parent.
---
I've also included some related cleanup for the code added by #117827. That code was more complicated than normal, because I wanted it to be easy to backport to stable/beta.
Added shadowed hint for overlapping associated types
Previously, when you tried to set an associated type that is shadowed by an associated type in a subtrait, like this:
```rust
trait A {
type X;
}
trait B: A {
type X; // note: this is legal
}
impl<Y> Clone for Box<dyn B<X=Y, X=Y>> {
fn clone(&self) -> Self {
todo!()
}
}
you got a confusing error message, that says nothing about the shadowing:
error[E0719]: the value of the associated type `X` (from trait `B`) is already specified
--> test.rs:9:34
|
9 | impl<Y> Clone for Box<dyn B<X=Y, X=Y>> {
| --- ^^^ re-bound here
| |
| `X` bound here first
error[E0191]: the value of the associated type `X` (from trait `A`) must be specified
--> test.rs:9:27
|
2 | type X;
| ------ `X` defined here
...
9 | impl<Y> Clone for Box<dyn B<X=Y, X=Y>> {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ help: specify the associated type: `B<X=Y, X=Y, X = Type>`
error: aborting due to 2 previous errors
Some errors have detailed explanations: E0191, E0719.
For more information about an error, try `rustc --explain E0191`.
```
Now instead, the error shows that the associated type is shadowed, and suggests renaming as a potential fix.
```rust
error[E0719]: the value of the associated type `X` in trait `B` is already specified
--> test.rs:9:34
|
9 | impl<Y> Clone for Box<dyn B<X=Y, X=Y>> {
| --- ^^^ re-bound here
| |
| `X` bound here first
error[E0191]: the value of the associated type `X` in `A` must be specified
--> test.rs:9:27
|
2 | type X;
| ------ `A::X` defined here
...
6 | type X; // note: this is legal
| ------ `A::X` shadowed here
...
9 | impl<Y> Clone for Box<dyn B<X=Y, X=Y>> {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ associated type `X` must be specified
|
help: consider renaming this associated type
--> test.rs:2:5
|
2 | type X;
| ^^^^^^
help: consider renaming this associated type
--> test.rs:6:5
|
6 | type X; // note: this is legal
| ^^^^^^
```
error: aborting due to 2 previous errors
Some errors have detailed explanations: E0191, E0719.
For more information about an error, try `rustc --explain E0191`.
The rename help message is only emitted when the trait is local. This is true both for the supertrait as for the subtrait.
There might be cases where you can use the fully qualified path (for instance, in a where clause), but this PR currently does not deal with that.
fixes#100109
(continues from #117642, because I didn't know renaming the branch would close the PR)
Shadowing the associated type of a supertrait is allowed.
This however makes it impossible to set the associated type
of the supertrait in a dyn object.
This PR makes the error message for that case clearer, like
adding a note that shadowing is happening, as well as suggesting
renaming of one of the associated types.
r=petrochenckov
Use `unwinding` crate for unwinding on Xous platform
This patch adds support for using [unwinding](https://github.com/nbdd0121/unwinding) on platforms where libunwinding isn't viable. An example of such a platform is `riscv32imac-unknown-xous-elf`.
### Background
The Rust project maintains a fork of llvm at [llvm-project](https://github.com/rust-lang/llvm-project/) where it applies patches on top of the llvm project. This mostly seems to be to get unwinding support for the SGX project, and there may be other patches that I'm unaware of.
There is a lot of machinery in the build system to support compiling `libunwind` on other platforms, and I needed to add additional patches to llvm in order to add support for Xous.
Rather than continuing down this path, it seemed much easier to use a Rust-based library. The `unwinding` crate by `@nbdd0121` fits this description perfectly.
### Future work
This could potentially replace the custom patches for `libunwind` on other platforms such as SGX, and could enable unwinding support on many more exotic platforms.
### Anti-goals
This is not designed to replace `libunwind` on tier-one platforms or those where unwinding support already exists. There is already a well-established approach for unwinding there. Instead, this aims to enable unwinding on new platforms where C++ code may be difficult to compile.
Two places called `from_utf8_unchecked` for strings from `alloc_slice`,
and one's SAFETY comment said this was for lack of `alloc_str` -- so
let's just add that instead!
Add `unwinding` as a permitted dependency of rustc, as it is now used as
part of panic unwinding within platforms such as Xous.
Signed-off-by: Sean Cross <sean@xobs.io>
The main() function takes an argument that contains the eh_frame
address. Implement `unwinding` support by looking for unwinding data at
this address.
Signed-off-by: Sean Cross <sean@xobs.io>
std: Invert logic for inclusion of `sys_common::net`
The `library/std/src/sys_common/net.rs` module is intended to define common implementations of networking-related APIs across a variety of platforms that share similar APIs (e.g. Berkeley-style sockets and all). This module is not included for more fringe targets however such as UEFI or "unknown" targets to libstd (those classified as `restricted-std`). Previously the `sys_common/net.rs` file was set up such that an allow-list indicated it shouldn't be used. This commit inverts the logic to have an allow-list of when it should be used instead.
The goal of this commit is to make it a bit easier to experiment with a new Rust target. Currently more esoteric targets are required to get an exception in this `cfg_if` block to use `crate::sys::net` such as for unsupported targets. With this inversion of logic only targets which actually support networking will be listed, where most of those are lumped under `cfg(unix)`.
Given that this change is likely to cause some breakage for some target by accident I've attempted to be somewhat robust with this by following these steps to defining the new predicate for inverted logic.
1. Take all supported targets and filter out all `cfg(unix)` ones as these should all support `sys_common/net.rs`.
2. Take remaining targets and filter out `cfg(windows)` ones.
3. The remaining dozen-or-so targets were all audited by hand. Mostly this included `target_os = "hermit"` and `target_os = "solid_asp3"` which required an allow-list entry, but remaining targets were all already excluded (didn't use `sys_common/net.rs` so they were left out.
If this causes breakage it should be relatively easy to fix and I'd be happy to follow-up with any PRs necessary.
When a method chain ending in `?` causes an E0277 because the
expression's `Result::Err` variant doesn't have a type that can be
converted to the `Result<_, E>` type parameter in the return type,
provide additional context of which parts of the chain can and can't
support the `?` operator.
```
error[E0277]: `?` couldn't convert the error to `String`
--> $DIR/question-mark-result-err-mismatch.rs:28:25
|
LL | fn bar() -> Result<(), String> {
| ------------------ expected `String` because of this
LL | let x = foo();
| ----- this can be annotated with `?` because it has type `Result<String, String>`
LL | let one = x
LL | .map(|s| ())
| ----------- this can be annotated with `?` because it has type `Result<(), String>`
LL | .map_err(|_| ())?;
| ---------------^ the trait `From<()>` is not implemented for `String`
| |
| this can't be annotated with `?` because it has type `Result<(), ()>`
|
= note: the question mark operation (`?`) implicitly performs a conversion on the error value using the `From` trait
= help: the following other types implement trait `From<T>`:
<String as From<char>>
<String as From<Box<str>>>
<String as From<Cow<'a, str>>>
<String as From<&str>>
<String as From<&mut str>>
<String as From<&String>>
= note: required for `Result<(), String>` to implement `FromResidual<Result<Infallible, ()>>`
```
Fix#72124.
Split `Vec::dedup_by` into 2 cycles
First cycle runs until we found 2 same elements, second runs after if there any found in the first one. This allows to avoid any memory writes until we found an item which we want to remove.
This leads to significant performance gains if all `Vec` items are kept: -40% on my benchmark with unique integers.
Results of benchmarks before implementation (including new benchmark where nothing needs to be removed):
* vec::bench_dedup_all_100 74.00ns/iter +/- 13.00ns
* vec::bench_dedup_all_1000 572.00ns/iter +/- 272.00ns
* vec::bench_dedup_all_100000 64.42µs/iter +/- 19.47µs
* __vec::bench_dedup_none_100 67.00ns/iter +/- 17.00ns__
* __vec::bench_dedup_none_1000 662.00ns/iter +/- 86.00ns__
* __vec::bench_dedup_none_10000 9.16µs/iter +/- 2.71µs__
* __vec::bench_dedup_none_100000 91.25µs/iter +/- 1.82µs__
* vec::bench_dedup_random_100 105.00ns/iter +/- 11.00ns
* vec::bench_dedup_random_1000 781.00ns/iter +/- 10.00ns
* vec::bench_dedup_random_10000 9.00µs/iter +/- 5.62µs
* vec::bench_dedup_random_100000 449.81µs/iter +/- 74.99µs
* vec::bench_dedup_slice_truncate_100 105.00ns/iter +/- 16.00ns
* vec::bench_dedup_slice_truncate_1000 2.65µs/iter +/- 481.00ns
* vec::bench_dedup_slice_truncate_10000 18.33µs/iter +/- 5.23µs
* vec::bench_dedup_slice_truncate_100000 501.12µs/iter +/- 46.97µs
Results after implementation:
* vec::bench_dedup_all_100 75.00ns/iter +/- 9.00ns
* vec::bench_dedup_all_1000 494.00ns/iter +/- 117.00ns
* vec::bench_dedup_all_100000 58.13µs/iter +/- 8.78µs
* __vec::bench_dedup_none_100 52.00ns/iter +/- 22.00ns__
* __vec::bench_dedup_none_1000 417.00ns/iter +/- 116.00ns__
* __vec::bench_dedup_none_10000 4.11µs/iter +/- 546.00ns__
* __vec::bench_dedup_none_100000 40.47µs/iter +/- 5.36µs__
* vec::bench_dedup_random_100 77.00ns/iter +/- 15.00ns
* vec::bench_dedup_random_1000 681.00ns/iter +/- 86.00ns
* vec::bench_dedup_random_10000 11.66µs/iter +/- 2.22µs
* vec::bench_dedup_random_100000 469.35µs/iter +/- 20.53µs
* vec::bench_dedup_slice_truncate_100 100.00ns/iter +/- 5.00ns
* vec::bench_dedup_slice_truncate_1000 2.55µs/iter +/- 224.00ns
* vec::bench_dedup_slice_truncate_10000 18.95µs/iter +/- 2.59µs
* vec::bench_dedup_slice_truncate_100000 492.85µs/iter +/- 72.84µs
Resolves#77772
P.S. Note that this is same PR as #92104 I just missed review then forgot about it.
Also, I cannot reopen that pull request so I am creating a new one.
I responded to remaining questions directly by adding commentaries to my code.
Although, we would like to avoid crashes whenever
possible, and that's why I wanted to make this API fallible. It's
looking pretty hard to do proper validation.
I think many of our APIs will unfortunately depend on the user doing
the correct thing since at the MIR level we are working on,
we expect types to have been checked already.
