fix `-Zsanitizer=kcfi` on `#[naked]` functions
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/143266
With `-Zsanitizer=kcfi`, indirect calls happen via generated intermediate shim that forwards the call. The generated shim preserves the attributes of the original, including `#[unsafe(naked)]`. The shim is not a naked function though, and violates its invariants (like having a body that consists of a single `naked_asm!` call).
My fix here is to match on the `InstanceKind`, and only use `codegen_naked_asm` when the instance is not a `ReifyShim`. That does beg the question whether there are other `InstanceKind`s that could come up. As far as I can tell the answer is no: calling via `dyn` seems to work find, and `#[track_caller]` is disallowed in combination with `#[naked]`.
r? codegen
````@rustbot```` label +A-naked
cc ````@maurer```` ````@rcvalle````
There are many places that join path segments with `::` to produce a
string. A lot of these use `join("::")`. Many in rustdoc use
`join_with_double_colon`, and a few use `.joined("..")`. One in Clippy
uses `itertools::join`. A couple of them look for `kw::PathRoot` in the
first segment, which can be important.
This commit introduces `rustc_ast::join_path_{syms,ident}` to do the
joining for everyone. `rustc_ast` is as good a location for these as
any, being the earliest-running of the several crates with a `Path`
type. Two functions are needed because `Ident` printing is more complex
than simple `Symbol` printing.
The commit also removes `join_with_double_colon`, and
`estimate_item_path_byte_length` with it.
There are still a handful of places that join strings with "::" that are
unchanged. They are not that important: some of them are in tests, and
some of them first split a path around "::" and then rejoin with "::".
This fixes one test case where `{{root}}` shows up in an error message.
`{{root}}` is supposed to be an internal-only name but it shows up in
the output.
(I'm working towards a more general fix -- a universal "joiner" function
that can be used all over the place -- but I'm not there yet, so let's
fix this one in-place for now.)
split `asm!` parsing and validation
This PR splits `asm!` parsing and validation into two separate steps.
The parser constructs a `Vec<RawAsmArg>`, with each element corresponding to an argument to one of the `asm!` macros.
The validation then checks things like ordering of arguments or that options are not provided twice.
The motivation is https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/140279, which wants to add `#[cfg(...)]` support to these arguments. This support can now be added in a straightforward way by adding an `attributes: ast::AttrVec` field to `RawAsmArg`.
An extra reason for this split is that `rustfmt` probably wants to format the assembly at some point (currently that appears to be stubbed out, and the formatting is unstable https://github.com/rust-lang/style-team/issues/152).
r? ``@ghost`` (just want to look at CI for now)
cc ``@ytmimi`` we discussed asm formatting a little while ago in https://github.com/rust-lang/rustfmt/issues/6526. Am I correct in assuming that `AsmArgs` does not give enough information for formatting, but that `RawAsmArgs` would (it e.g. does not join information from multiple lines). This must have been an issue before?
try-job: aarch64-apple
allow `#[rustc_std_internal_symbol]` in combination with `#[naked]`
The need for this came up in https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-builtins/pull/897, but in general this seems useful and valid to allow.
Based on a quick scan, I don't think changes to the generated assembly are needed.
cc ``@bjorn3``
Move inline asm check to typeck, properly handle aliases
Pull `InlineAsmCtxt` down to `rustc_hir_typeck`, and instead of using things like `Ty::is_copy`, use the `InferCtxt`-aware methods. To fix https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/189, we also add a `try_structurally_resolve_*` call to `expr_ty`.
r? lcnr
add `naked_functions_rustic_abi` feature gate
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/138997
Because the details of the rust abi are unstable, and a naked function must match its stated ABI, this feature gate keeps naked functions with a rustic abi ("Rust", "rust-cold", "rust-call" and "rust-intrinsic") unstable.
r? ````@traviscross````
add `naked_functions_target_feature` unstable feature
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/138568
tagging https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/134213https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/90957
This PR puts `#[target_feature(/* ... */)]` on `#[naked]` functions behind its own feature gate, so that naked functions can be stabilized. It turns out that supporting `target_feature` on naked functions is tricky on some targets, so we're splitting it out to not block stabilization of naked functions themselves. See the tracking issue for more information and workarounds.
Note that at the time of writing, the `target_features` attribute is ignored when generating code for naked functions.
r? ``@Amanieu``
Do not suggest using `-Zmacro-backtrace` for builtin macros
For macros that are implemented on the compiler, or that are annotated with `rustc_diagnostic_item`, which have arbitrary implementations from the point of view of the user and might as well be intrinsics, we do *not* mention the `-Zmacro-backtrace` flag. This includes `derive`s and standard macros like `panic!` and `format!`.
This PR adds a field to every `Span`'s `ExpnData` stating whether it comes from a builtin macro. This is determined by the macro being annotated with either `#[rustc_builtin_macro]` or `#[rustc_diagnostic_item]`. An alternative to using these attributes that already exist for other uses would be to introduce another attribute like `#[rustc_no_backtrace]` to have finer control on which macros are affected (for example, an error within `vec![]` now doesn't mention the backtrace, but one could make the case that it should). Ideally, instead of carrying this information in the `ExpnData` we'd instead try to query the `DefId` of the macro (that is already stored) to see if it is annotated in some way, but we do not have access to the `TyCtxt` from `rustc_errors`.
r? `@petrochenkov`
rustc_target: Add target features for LoongArch v1.1
This patch adds new target features for LoongArch v1.1:
* div32
* lam-bh
* lamcas
* ld-seq-sa
* scq
