compiler: gate `extern "{abi}"` in ast_lowering
I don't believe low-level crates like `rustc_abi` should have to know or care about higher-level concerns like whether the ABI string is stable for users. These implementation details can be made less open to public inspection. This way the code that governs stability is near the code that enforces stability, and compiled together.
It also abstracts away certain error messages instead of constantly repeating them.
A few error messages are simply deleted outright, instead of made uniform, because they are either too dated to be useful or redundant with other diagnostic improvements we could make. These can be pursued in followups: my first concern was making sure there wasn't unnecessary diagnostics-related code in `rustc_abi`, which is not well-positioned to understand what kind of errors are going to be generated based on how it is used.
r? ``@ghost``
Add amdgpu target
Add amdgpu target to rustc and enable the LLVM target.
Fix compiling `core` with the amdgpu:
The amdgpu backend makes heavy use of different address spaces. This
leads to situations, where a pointer in one addrspace needs to be casted
to a pointer in a different addrspace. `bitcast` is invalid for this
case, `addrspacecast` needs to be used.
Fix compilation failures that created bitcasts for such cases by
creating pointer casts (which creates an `addrspacecast` under the hood)
instead.
MCP: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/823
Tracking issue: #135024
Kinda related to the original amdgpu tracking issue #51575 (though that one has been closed for a while).
By moving this stability check into AST lowering, we effectively make
it impossible to accidentally miss, as it must happen to generate HIR.
Also, we put the ABI-stability code next to code that actually uses it!
This allows code that wants to reason about backend ABI implementations
to stop worrying about high-level concerns like syntax stability,
while still leaving it as the authority on what ABIs actually exist.
It also makes it easy to refactor things to have more consistent errors.
For now, we only apply this to generalize the existing messages a bit.
compiler: Clean up weird `rustc_abi` reexports
Just general cleanup in `rustc_target` and `rustc_abi`. I was originally going to make a PR with a larger change that also fixed the last few crates and in doing so removed some clutter from `rustc_abi`, but wound up slightly stuck on it, then figured out how to fix it, and then got distracted by other things... so now I'm trying to figure out what I had figured out earlier.
rustc_target has had a lot of weird reexports for various reasons, but
now we're at a point where we can actually start reducing their number.
We remove weird shadowing-dependent behavior and import directly from
rustc_abi instead of doing weird renaming imports.
This is only incremental progress and does not entirely fix the crate.
Explicitly choose x86 softfloat/hardfloat ABI
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/135408:
Instead of choosing this based on the target features listed in the target spec, make that choice explicit.
All built-in targets are being updated here; custom (JSON-defined) x86 (32bit and 64bit) softfloat targets need to explicitly set `rustc-abi` to `x86-softfloat`.
Target option to require explicit cpu
Some targets have many different CPUs and no generic CPU that can be used as a default. For these targets, the user needs to explicitly specify a CPU through `-C target-cpu=`.
Add an option for targets and an error message if no CPU is set.
This affects the proposed amdgpu and avr targets.
amdgpu tracking issue: #135024
AVR MCP: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/800
Add gpu-kernel calling convention
The amdgpu-kernel calling convention was reverted in commit f6b21e90d1 (#120495 and https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer/pull/16463) due to inactivity in the amdgpu target.
Introduce a `gpu-kernel` calling convention that translates to `ptx_kernel` or `amdgpu_kernel`, depending on the target that rust compiles for.
Tracking issue: #135467
amdgpu target tracking issue: #135024
Some targets have many different CPUs and no generic CPU that can be
used as a default. For these targets, the user needs to explicitly
specify a CPU through `-C target-cpu=`.
Add an option for targets and an error message if no CPU is set.
This affects the proposed amdgpu and avr targets.
The amdgpu-kernel calling convention was reverted in commit
f6b21e90d1 due to inactivity in the amdgpu
target.
Introduce a `gpu-kernel` calling convention that translates to
`ptx_kernel` or `amdgpu_kernel`, depending on the target that rust
compiles for.
add m68k-unknown-none-elf target
r? `@workingjubilee`
The existing `m68k-unknown-linux-gnu` target builds `std` by default, requires atomics, and has a base cpu with an fpu. A smaller/more embedded target is desirable both to have a baseline target for the ISA, as well to make debugging easier for working on the llvm backend. Currently this target is using the `M68010` as the minimum CPU due, but as missing features are merged into the `M68k` llvm backend I am hoping to lower this further.
I have been able to build very small crates using a toolchain built against this target (together with a later version of `object`) using the configuration described in the target platform-support documentation, although getting anything of substantial complexity to build quickly hits errors in the llvm backend
Add a notion of "some ABIs require certain target features"
I think I finally found the right shape for the data and checks that I recently added in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/133099, https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/133417, https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/134337: we have a notion of "this ABI requires the following list of target features, and it is incompatible with the following list of target features". Both `-Ctarget-feature` and `#[target_feature]` are updated to ensure we follow the rules of the ABI. This removes all the "toggleability" stuff introduced before, though we do keep the notion of a fully "forbidden" target feature -- this is needed to deal with target features that are actual ABI switches, and hence are needed to even compute the list of required target features.
We always explicitly (un)set all required and in-conflict features, just to avoid potential trouble caused by the default features of whatever the base CPU is. We do this *before* applying `-Ctarget-feature` to maintain backward compatibility; this poses a slight risk of missing some implicit feature dependencies in LLVM but has the advantage of not breaking users that deliberately toggle ABI-relevant target features. They get a warning but the feature does get toggled the way they requested.
For now, our logic supports x86, ARM, and RISC-V (just like the previous logic did). Unsurprisingly, RISC-V is the nicest. ;)
As a side-effect this also (unstably) allows *enabling* `x87` when that is harmless. I used the opportunity to mark SSE2 as required on x86-64, to better match the actual logic in LLVM and because all x86-64 chips do have SSE2. This infrastructure also prepares us for requiring SSE on x86-32 when we want to use that for our ABI (and for float semantics sanity), see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/133611, but no such change is happening in this PR.
r? `@workingjubilee`
Do the same thing as gcc, which use the vendor `mti` to mark
the toolchain as MIPS32r2 default.
We support both big endian and little endian flavor:
mips-mti-none-elf
mipsel-mti-none-elf
`rustc_span::symbol` defines some things that are re-exported from
`rustc_span`, such as `Symbol` and `sym`. But it doesn't re-export some
closely related things such as `Ident` and `kw`. So you can do `use
rustc_span::{Symbol, sym}` but you have to do `use
rustc_span::symbol::{Ident, kw}`, which is inconsistent for no good
reason.
This commit re-exports `Ident`, `kw`, and `MacroRulesNormalizedIdent`,
and changes many `rustc_span::symbol::` qualifiers in `compiler/` to
`rustc_span::`. This is a 200+ net line of code reduction, mostly
because many files with two `use rustc_span` items can be reduced to
one.
rust_for_linux: -Zreg-struct-return commandline flag for X86 (#116973)
Command line flag `-Zreg-struct-return` for X86 (32-bit) for rust-for-linux.
This flag enables the same behavior as the `abi_return_struct_as_int` target spec key.
- Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116973
Remove the `wasm32-wasi` target from rustc
This commit is the final step in the journey of renaming the historical `wasm32-wasi` target in the Rust compiler to `wasm32-wasip1`. Various steps in this journey so far have been:
* 2023-04-03: rust-lang/compiler-team#607 - initial proposal for this rename
* 2024-11-27: rust-lang/compiler-team#695 - amended schedule/procedure for rename
* 2024-01-29: rust-lang/rust#120468 - initial introduction of `wasm32-wasip1`
* 2024-06-18: rust-lang/rust#126662 - warn on usage of `wasm32-wasi`
* 2024-11-08: this PR - remove the `wasm32-wasi` target
The full transition schedule is in [this comment][comment] and is summarized with:
* 2024-05-02: Rust 1.78 released with `wasm32-wasip1` target
* 2024-09-05: Rust 1.81 released warning on usage of `wasm32-wasi`
* 2025-01-09: Rust 1.84 to be released without the `wasm32-wasi` target
This means that support on stable for the replacement target of `wasm32-wasip1` has currently been available for 6 months. Users have already seen warnings on stable for 2 months about usage of `wasm32-wasi` and stable users have another 2 months of warnings before the target is removed from stable.
This commit is intended to be the final step in this transition so the source tree should no longer mention `wasm32-wasi` except in historical reference to the older name of the `wasm32-wasip1` target.
[comment]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120468#issuecomment-1977878747
This commit is the final step in the journey of renaming the historical
`wasm32-wasi` target in the Rust compiler to `wasm32-wasip1`. Various
steps in this journey so far have been:
* 2023-04-03: rust-lang/compiler-team#607 - initial proposal for this rename
* 2024-11-27: rust-lang/compiler-team#695 - amended schedule/procedure for rename
* 2024-01-29: rust-lang/rust#120468 - initial introduction of `wasm32-wasip1`
* 2024-06-18: rust-lang/rust#126662 - warn on usage of `wasm32-wasi`
* 2024-11-08: this PR - remove the `wasm32-wasi` target
The full transition schedule is in [this comment][comment] and is
summarized with:
* 2024-05-02: Rust 1.78 released with `wasm32-wasip1` target
* 2024-09-05: Rust 1.81 released warning on usage of `wasm32-wasi`
* 2025-01-09: Rust 1.84 to be released without the `wasm32-wasi` target
This means that support on stable for the replacement target of
`wasm32-wasip1` has currently been available for 6 months. Users have
already seen warnings on stable for 2 months about usage of
`wasm32-wasi` and stable users have another 2 months of warnings before
the target is removed from stable.
This commit is intended to be the final step in this transition so the
source tree should no longer mention `wasm32-wasi` except in historical
reference to the older name of the `wasm32-wasip1` target.
[comment]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120468#issuecomment-1977878747
