compiler: fn ptrs should hit different lints based on ABI
I was looking closer at the code for linting on ABIs and realized a mistake was probably made during rebase or review. I think that for function pointers in the HIR, the lint that fires should probably depend on the ABI we encountered, e.g. if it's on the newly-deprecated set of ABIs or not. This will be slightly confusing for a little bit, but I think we can do more to reduce that confusion by switching `unsupported_fn_ptr_calling_conventions` to a hard error.
r? ``@RalfJung``
deduplicate the rest of AST walker functions
After this, we can tidy things up and deduplicate the visitor traits themselves too.
Fixesrust-lang/rust#139825, apparently
r? ``@oli-obk``
use `#[naked]` for `__rust_probestack`
Let's see if this works now.
Previously this change was in https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-builtins/pull/897, but we decided to wait until `compiler-builtins` was a subtree (and also `cfg(bootstrap)` is gone now).
r? ``@tgross35`` cc ``@bjorn3``
try-job: `dist-various*`
try-job: `test-various*`
Note the version and PR of removed features when using it
Fixesrust-lang/rust#141619
I added the diagnostic information. Since all the current version information is present, it prints the version information anyway, as shown in tests/ui. And PR will not print if it is None, we can gradually add the PR links.
Split into two commits for easier review.
r? compiler
cc ``@jyn514`` Since you're on vocation in the review list, I can't r? you.
Stabilize keylocker
This PR stabilizes the feature flag `keylocker_x86` (tracking issue rust-lang/rust#134813).
# Public API
The 2 `x86` target features `kl` and `widekl`, and the associated intrinsics in stdarch.
These target features are very specialized, and are only used to signal the presence of the corresponding CPU instruction. They don't have any nontrivial interaction with the ABI (contrary to something like AVX), and serve the only purpose of enabling 11 stdarch intrinsics, all of which have been implemented and propagated to rustc via a stdarch submodule update.
Also, these were added way back in LLVM12, and as the minimum LLVM required for rustc is LLVM19, we are safe in that front too!
# Associated PRs
- rust-lang/rust#134814
- rust-lang/stdarch#1706
- rust-lang/rust#136831 (stdarch submodule update)
- rust-lang/stdarch#1795 (stabilizing the runtime detection and intrinsics)
- rust-lang/rust#141964 (stdarch submodule update for the stabilization of the runtime detection and intrinsics)
As all of the required tasks have been done (adding the target features to rustc, implementing their runtime detection in std_detect and implementing the associated intrinsics in core_arch), these target features can be stabilized now.
cc ````@rust-lang/lang````
cc ````@rust-lang/libs-api```` for the intrinsics and runtime detection
I don't think anyone else worked on this feature, so no one else to ping, maybe cc ````@Amanieu.```` I will send the reference pr soon.
Exhaustively handle parsed attributes in CheckAttr
This pr
- Deletes the unused `DiagnosticAttribute ` struct and variant
- Comments the `AttributeKind ` enum
- The match in `CheckAttrVisitor` is now exhaustive for `AttributeKind::Parsed`.
- Moved some checks around after that change
I did *not* thoroughly check that there's no duplicated logic between this pass and the attribute parsing but I think it's OK.
r? ````@jdonszelmann````
mir-opt: Do not create storage marks in EarlyOtherwiseBranch
Fixes#141212.
The first commit add `StorageDead` by creating new indirect BB that makes CFG more complicated, but I think it's better to just not create storage marks.
r? mir-opt
Stabilize `sha512`, `sm3` and `sm4` for x86
This PR stabilizes the feature flag `sha512_sm_x86` (tracking issue rust-lang/rust#126624).
# Public API
The 3 `x86` target features `sha512`, `sm3` and `sm4`, and the associated intrinsics in stdarch.
These target features are very specialized, and are only used to signal the presence of the corresponding CPU instruction. They don't have any nontrivial interaction with the ABI (contrary to something like AVX), and serve the only purpose of enabling 10 stdarch intrinsics, all of which have been implemented and propagated to rustc via a stdarch submodule update.
Also, these were added in LLVM17, and as the minimum LLVM required for rustc is LLVM19, we are safe in that front too!
# Associated PRs
- rust-lang/rust#126704
- rust-lang/stdarch#1592
- rust-lang/stdarch#1790
- rust-lang/rust#140389 (stdarch submodule update)
- rust-lang/stdarch#1796 (stabilizing the runtime detection and intrinsics)
- rust-lang/rust#141964 (stdarch submodule update for the stabilization of the runtime detection and intrinsics)
As all of the required tasks have been done (adding the target features to rustc, implementing their runtime detection in std_detect and implementing the associated intrinsics in core_arch), these target features can be stabilized now.
cc `@rust-lang/lang`
cc `@rust-lang/libs-api` for the intrinsics and runtime detection
I don't think anyone else worked on this feature, so no one else to ping, maybe cc `@Amanieu.` I will send the reference pr soon.
Previously, `rustc_transmute`'s layout representations were genericized
over `R`, a reference. Now, it's instead genericized over
representations of type and region. This allows us to move reference
transmutability logic from `rustc_trait_selection` to
`rustc_transmutability` (and thus unit test it independently of the
compiler), and — in a follow-up PR — will make it possible to support
analyzing function pointer transmutability with minimal surgery.
Dont make `ObligationCtxt`s with diagnostics unnecessarily
just a nit, shouldn't affect perf b/c `ObligationCtxt::new_with_diagnostics` should only be more expensive in the new trait solver, and I don't expect either of these to encounter errors today anyways.
r? oli-obk
