Stabilize `sse4a` and `tbm` target features
This PR stabilizes the feature flag `sse4a_target_feature` and `tbm_target_feature` (tracking issue rust-lang/rust#44839).
# Public API
The 2 `x86` target features `sse4a` and `tbm`
Also, these were added in LLVM2.6 and LLVM3.4-rc1, respectively, and as the minimum LLVM required for rustc is LLVM19, we are safe in that front too!
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. The intrinsics were stabilized *long* ago, in 1.27.0
Reference PR:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/pull/1949
cc `@rust-lang/lang`
`@rustbot` label I-lang-nominated
r? lang
Add aarch64_be-unknown-none-softfloat target
This adds a new target for bare-metal big endian ARM64 without FPU. We want to use this in [the Hermit unikernel](https://github.com/hermit-os/kernel) because big endian ARM64 is the most accessible big endian architecture for us and it can be supported with our existing aarch64 code. I have compiled our kernel and bootloader with this target and they work as expected in QEMU.
Regarding the [tier 3 target policy](https://doc.rust-lang.org/rustc/target-tier-policy.html#tier-3-target-policy):
> - A tier 3 target must have a designated developer or developers (the "target maintainers") on record to be CCed when issues arise regarding the target. (The mechanism to track and CC such developers may evolve over time.)
The maintainer(s) (currently just me) are listed in the markdown document that documents the target.
> - Targets must use naming consistent with any existing targets; for instance, a target for the same CPU or OS as an existing Rust target should use the same name for that CPU or OS. Targets should normally use the same names and naming conventions as used elsewhere in the broader ecosystem beyond Rust (such as in other toolchains), unless they have a very good reason to diverge. Changing the name of a target can be highly disruptive, especially once the target reaches a higher tier, so getting the name right is important even for a tier 3 target.
> - Target names should not introduce undue confusion or ambiguity unless absolutely necessary to maintain ecosystem compatibility. For example, if the name of the target makes people extremely likely to form incorrect beliefs about what it targets, the name should be changed or augmented to disambiguate it.
> - If possible, use only letters, numbers, dashes and underscores for the name. Periods (.) are known to cause issues in Cargo.
The target name is consistent with the existing `aarch64-unknown-none-softfloat` target and the existing big endian aarch64 targets like `aarch64_be-unknown-linux-gnu`.
> - Tier 3 targets may have unusual requirements to build or use, but must not create legal issues or impose onerous legal terms for the Rust project or for Rust developers or users.
> - The target must not introduce license incompatibilities.
> - Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust license (MIT OR Apache-2.0).
> - The target must not cause the Rust tools or libraries built for any other host (even when supporting cross-compilation to the target) to depend on any new dependency less permissive than the Rust licensing policy. This applies whether the dependency is a Rust crate that would require adding new license exceptions (as specified by the tidy tool in the rust-lang/rust repository), or whether the dependency is a native library or binary. In other words, the introduction of the target must not cause a user installing or running a version of Rust or the Rust tools to be subject to any new license requirements.
> - Compiling, linking, and emitting functional binaries, libraries, or other code for the target (whether hosted on the target itself or cross-compiling from another target) must not depend on proprietary (non-FOSS) libraries. Host tools built for the target itself may depend on the ordinary runtime libraries supplied by the platform and commonly used by other applications built for the target, but those libraries must not be required for code generation for the target; cross-compilation to the target must not require such libraries at all. For instance, rustc built for the target may depend on a common proprietary C runtime library or console output library, but must not depend on a proprietary code generation library or code optimization library. Rust's license permits such combinations, but the Rust project has no interest in maintaining such combinations within the scope of Rust itself, even at tier 3.
> - "onerous" here is an intentionally subjective term. At a minimum, "onerous" legal/licensing terms include but are not limited to: non-disclosure requirements, non-compete requirements, contributor license agreements (CLAs) or equivalent, "non-commercial"/"research-only"/etc terms, requirements conditional on the employer or employment of any particular Rust developers, revocable terms, any requirements that create liability for the Rust project or its developers or users, or any requirements that adversely affect the livelihood or prospects of the Rust project or its developers or users.
There are no licensing issues and any toolchain that can compile for `aarch64-unknown-none-softfloat` can also compile for `aarch64_be-unknown-none-softfloat` (well, at least GCC and LLVM). No proprietary components are required.
> - Neither this policy nor any decisions made regarding targets shall create any binding agreement or estoppel by any party. If any member of an approving Rust team serves as one of the maintainers of a target, or has any legal or employment requirement (explicit or implicit) that might affect their decisions regarding a target, they must recuse themselves from any approval decisions regarding the target's tier status, though they may otherwise participate in discussions.
> - This requirement does not prevent part or all of this policy from being cited in an explicit contract or work agreement (e.g. to implement or maintain support for a target). This requirement exists to ensure that a developer or team responsible for reviewing and approving a target does not face any legal threats or obligations that would prevent them from freely exercising their judgment in such approval, even if such judgment involves subjective matters or goes beyond the letter of these requirements.
Ack.
> - Tier 3 targets should attempt to implement as much of the standard libraries as possible and appropriate (core for most targets, alloc for targets that can support dynamic memory allocation, std for targets with an operating system or equivalent layer of system-provided functionality), but may leave some code unimplemented (either unavailable or stubbed out as appropriate), whether because the target makes it impossible to implement or challenging to implement. The authors of pull requests are not obligated to avoid calling any portions of the standard library on the basis of a tier 3 target not implementing those portions.
This target does not implement std and is equivalent to `aarch64-unknown-none-softfloat` in all these regards.
> - The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how to build for the target, using cross-compilation if possible. If the target supports running binaries, or running tests (even if they do not pass), the documentation must explain how to run such binaries or tests for the target, using emulation if possible or dedicated hardware if necessary.
Ack, that is part of the markdown document.
> - Tier 3 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or other developers in the community, to maintain 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 a tier 3 target. Do not send automated messages or notifications (via any medium, including via ```@)``` to a PR author or others involved with a PR regarding a tier 3 target, unless they have opted into such messages.
> - Backlinks such as those generated by the issue/PR tracker when linking to an issue or PR are not considered a violation of this policy, within reason. However, such messages (even on a separate repository) must not generate notifications to anyone involved with a PR who has not requested such notifications.
Ack.
> - Patches adding or updating tier 3 targets must not break any existing tier 2 or tier 1 target, and must not knowingly break another tier 3 target without approval of either the compiler team or the maintainers of the other tier 3 target.
> - In particular, this may come up when working on closely related targets, such as variations of the same architecture with different features. Avoid introducing unconditional uses of features that another variation of the target may not have; use conditional compilation or runtime detection, as appropriate, to let each target run code supported by that target.
This doesn't break any existing targets.
> - Tier 3 targets must be able to produce assembly using at least one of rustc's supported backends from any host target. (Having support in a fork of the backend is not sufficient, it must be upstream.)
The LLVM backend works.
> - If a tier 3 target stops meeting these requirements, or the target maintainers no longer have interest or time, or the target shows no signs of activity and has not built for some time, or removing the target would improve the quality of the Rust codebase, we may post a PR to remove it; any such PR will be CCed to the target maintainers (and potentially other people who have previously worked on the target), to check potential interest in improving the situation.
Ack.
aarch64: Make `outline-atomics` a known target feature
This is a feature used by LLVM that is enabled for our `aarch64-linux` targets, which we would like to configure on in `std`. Thus, mark `outline-atomics` a known feature. It is left unstable for now.
This is more in-line with what Apple's tooling expects, and allows us to
better support custom compiler drivers (such as certain Homebrew and
Nixpkgs compilers) that prefer their own `-isysroot` flag.
Effectively, we now invoke the compiler driver as-if it was invoked as
`xcrun -sdk $sdk_name $tool`.
It used to be necessary on Apple platforms to ship with the App Store,
but XCode 15 has stopped embedding LLVM bitcode and the App Store no
longer accepts apps with bitcode embedded.
Add minimal `armv7a-vex-v5` tier three target
This PR adds minimal, `no_std` support for the VEX V5 Brain, a robotics microcontroller used in educational contexts. In comparison to rust-lang/rust#131530, which aimed to add this same target, these changes are limited in scope to the compiler.
## Tier 3 Target Policy Compliance
> A tier 3 target must have a designated developer or developers (the "target maintainers") on record to be CCed when issues arise regarding the target. (The mechanism to track and CC such developers may evolve over time.)
Lewis McClelland (`@lewisfm),` `@Tropix126,` Gavin Niederman (`@Gavin-Niederman),` and Max Niederman (`@max-niederman)` will be the designated maintainers for `armv7a-vex-v5` support.
> Targets must use naming consistent with any existing targets; for instance, a target for the same CPU or OS as an existing Rust target should use the same name for that CPU or OS. Targets should normally use the same names and naming conventions as used elsewhere in the broader ecosystem beyond Rust (such as in other toolchains), unless they have a very good reason to diverge. Changing the name of a target can be highly disruptive, especially once the target reaches a higher tier, so getting the name right is important even for a tier 3 target.
`armv7a-vex-v5` follows the cpu-vendor-model convention used by most tier three targets. For example: `armv76k-nintendo-3ds` or `armv7k-apple-watchos`.
> Target names should not introduce undue confusion or ambiguity unless absolutely necessary to maintain ecosystem compatibility. For example, if the name of the target makes people extremely likely to form incorrect beliefs about what it targets, the name should be changed or augmented to disambiguate it.
> If possible, use only letters, numbers, dashes and underscores for the name. Periods (.) are known to cause issues in Cargo.
This target name is not confusing.
> Tier 3 targets may have unusual requirements to build or use, but must not create legal issues or impose onerous legal terms for the Rust project or for Rust developers or users.
It's using open source tools only.
> The target must not introduce license incompatibilities.
>
> Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust license (MIT OR Apache-2.0).
Understood.
> The target must not cause the Rust tools or libraries built for any other host (even when supporting cross-compilation to the target) to depend on any new dependency less permissive than the Rust licensing policy. This applies whether the dependency is a Rust crate that would require adding new license exceptions (as specified by the tidy tool in the rust-lang/rust repository), or whether the dependency is a native library or binary. In other words, the introduction of the target must not cause a user installing or running a version of Rust or the Rust tools to be subject to any new license requirements.
There are no new dependencies/features required in the current state of this target. Porting the standard library will likely require depending on the crate `vex-sdk` which is MIT-licensed and contains bindings to the VEX SDK runtime (which is included in VEXos).
> Compiling, linking, and emitting functional binaries, libraries, or other code for the target (whether hosted on the target itself or cross-compiling from another target) must not depend on proprietary (non-FOSS) libraries. Host tools built for the target itself may depend on the ordinary runtime libraries supplied by the platform and commonly used by other applications built for the target, but those libraries must not be required for code generation for the target; cross-compilation to the target must not require such libraries at all. For instance, rustc built for the target may depend on a common proprietary C runtime library or console output library, but must not depend on a proprietary code generation library or code optimization library. Rust's license permits such combinations, but the Rust project has no interest in maintaining such combinations within the scope of Rust itself, even at tier 3.
>
> "onerous" here is an intentionally subjective term. At a minimum, "onerous" legal/licensing terms include but are not limited to: non-disclosure requirements, non-compete requirements, contributor license agreements (CLAs) or equivalent, "non-commercial"/"research-only"/etc terms, requirements conditional on the employer or employment of any particular Rust developers, revocable terms, any requirements that create liability for the Rust project or its developers or users, or any requirements that adversely affect the livelihood or prospects of the Rust project or its developers or users.
Although the VEX V5 Brain and its SDK are proprietary, this target does not link to any proprietary binaries or libraries, and is based solely on publicly available information about the VEX SDK.
> Neither this policy nor any decisions made regarding targets shall create any binding agreement or estoppel by any party. If any member of an approving Rust team serves as one of the maintainers of a target, or has any legal or employment requirement (explicit or implicit) that might affect their decisions regarding a target, they must recuse themselves from any approval decisions regarding the target's tier status, though they may otherwise participate in discussions.
>
> This requirement does not prevent part or all of this policy from being cited in an explicit contract or work agreement (e.g. to implement or maintain support for a target). This requirement exists to ensure that a developer or team responsible for reviewing and approving a target does not face any legal threats or obligations that would prevent them from freely exercising their judgment in such approval, even if such judgment involves subjective matters or goes beyond the letter of these requirements.
I understand.
> Tier 3 targets should attempt to implement as much of the standard libraries as possible and appropriate (core for most targets, alloc for targets that can support dynamic memory allocation, std for targets with an operating system or equivalent layer of system-provided functionality), but may leave some code unimplemented (either unavailable or stubbed out as appropriate), whether because the target makes it impossible to implement or challenging to implement. The authors of pull requests are not obligated to avoid calling any portions of the standard library on the basis of a tier 3 target not implementing those portions.
This initial PR only contains a compiler target definition to teach the `cc` crate about this target. Porting the standard library is the next step for this target.
> The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how to build for the target, using cross-compilation if possible. If the target supports running binaries, or running tests (even if they do not pass), the documentation must explain how to run such binaries or tests for the target, using emulation if possible or dedicated hardware if necessary.
This target is documented in `src/doc/rustc/src/platform-support/armv7a-vex-v5.md`.
> Tier 3 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or other developers in the community, to maintain 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 a tier 3 target. Do not send automated messages or notifications (via any medium, including via `@)` to a PR author or others involved with a PR regarding a tier 3 target, unless they have opted into such messages.
>
> Backlinks such as those generated by the issue/PR tracker when linking to an issue or PR are not considered a violation of this policy, within reason. However, such messages (even on a separate repository) must not generate notifications to anyone involved with a PR who has not requested such notifications.
I understand and assent.
> Patches adding or updating tier 3 targets must not break any existing tier 2 or tier 1 target, and must not knowingly break another tier 3 target without approval of either the compiler team or the maintainers of the other tier 3 target.
>
> In particular, this may come up when working on closely related targets, such as variations of the same architecture with different features. Avoid introducing unconditional uses of features that another variation of the target may not have; use conditional compilation or runtime detection, as appropriate, to let each target run code supported by that target.
I understand and assent.
> Tier 3 targets must be able to produce assembly using at least one of rustc's supported backends from any host target. (Having support in a fork of the backend is not sufficient, it must be upstream.)
`armv7a-vex-v5` has nearly identical codegen to `armv7a-none-eabihf`, so this is not an issue.
> If a tier 3 target stops meeting these requirements, or the target maintainers no longer have interest or time, or the target shows no signs of activity and has not built for some time, or removing the target would improve the quality of the Rust codebase, we may post a PR to remove it; any such PR will be CCed to the target maintainers (and potentially other people who have previously worked on the target), to check potential interest in improving the situation.
I understand.
> A tier 3 target must have a designated developer or developers (the "target maintainers") on record to be CCed when issues arise regarding the target. (The mechanism to track and CC such developers may evolve over time.)
Lewis McClelland (lewisfm), Tropix126, Gavin Niederman (Gavin-Niederman), and Max Niederman (max-niederman) will be the designated maintainers for `armv7a-vex-v5` support.
> Targets must use naming consistent with any existing targets; for instance, a target for the same CPU or OS as an existing Rust target should use the same name for that CPU or OS. Targets should normally use the same names and naming conventions as used elsewhere in the broader ecosystem beyond Rust (such as in other toolchains), unless they have a very good reason to diverge. Changing the name of a target can be highly disruptive, especially once the target reaches a higher tier, so getting the name right is important even for a tier 3 target.
`armv7a-vex-v5` follows the cpu-vendor-model convention used by most tier three targets. For example: `armv76k-nintendo-3ds` or `armv7k-apple-watchos`.
> Target names should not introduce undue confusion or ambiguity unless absolutely necessary to maintain ecosystem compatibility. For example, if the name of the target makes people extremely likely to form incorrect beliefs about what it targets, the name should be changed or augmented to disambiguate it.
> If possible, use only letters, numbers, dashes and underscores for the name. Periods (.) are known to cause issues in Cargo.
This target name is not confusing.
> Tier 3 targets may have unusual requirements to build or use, but must not create legal issues or impose onerous legal terms for the Rust project or for Rust developers or users.
It's using open source tools only.
> The target must not introduce license incompatibilities.
>
> Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust license (MIT OR Apache-2.0).
Understood.
> The target must not cause the Rust tools or libraries built for any other host (even when supporting cross-compilation to the target) to depend on any new dependency less permissive than the Rust licensing policy. This applies whether the dependency is a Rust crate that would require adding new license exceptions (as specified by the tidy tool in the rust-lang/rust repository), or whether the dependency is a native library or binary. In other words, the introduction of the target must not cause a user installing or running a version of Rust or the Rust tools to be subject to any new license requirements.
There are no new dependencies/features required in the current state of this target. Porting the standard library will likely require depending on the crate `vex-sdk` which is MIT-licensed and contains bindings to the VEX SDK runtime (which is included in VEXos).
> Compiling, linking, and emitting functional binaries, libraries, or other code for the target (whether hosted on the target itself or cross-compiling from another target) must not depend on proprietary (non-FOSS) libraries. Host tools built for the target itself may depend on the ordinary runtime libraries supplied by the platform and commonly used by other applications built for the target, but those libraries must not be required for code generation for the target; cross-compilation to the target must not require such libraries at all. For instance, rustc built for the target may depend on a common proprietary C runtime library or console output library, but must not depend on a proprietary code generation library or code optimization library. Rust's license permits such combinations, but the Rust project has no interest in maintaining such combinations within the scope of Rust itself, even at tier 3.
>
> "onerous" here is an intentionally subjective term. At a minimum, "onerous" legal/licensing terms include but are not limited to: non-disclosure requirements, non-compete requirements, contributor license agreements (CLAs) or equivalent, "non-commercial"/"research-only"/etc terms, requirements conditional on the employer or employment of any particular Rust developers, revocable terms, any requirements that create liability for the Rust project or its developers or users, or any requirements that adversely affect the livelihood or prospects of the Rust project or its developers or users.
Although the VEX V5 Brain and its SDK are proprietary, this target does not link to any proprietary binaries or libraries, and is based solely on publicly available information about the VEX SDK.
> Neither this policy nor any decisions made regarding targets shall create any binding agreement or estoppel by any party. If any member of an approving Rust team serves as one of the maintainers of a target, or has any legal or employment requirement (explicit or implicit) that might affect their decisions regarding a target, they must recuse themselves from any approval decisions regarding the target's tier status, though they may otherwise participate in discussions.
>
> This requirement does not prevent part or all of this policy from being cited in an explicit contract or work agreement (e.g. to implement or maintain support for a target). This requirement exists to ensure that a developer or team responsible for reviewing and approving a target does not face any legal threats or obligations that would prevent them from freely exercising their judgment in such approval, even if such judgment involves subjective matters or goes beyond the letter of these requirements.
I understand.
> Tier 3 targets should attempt to implement as much of the standard libraries as possible and appropriate (core for most targets, alloc for targets that can support dynamic memory allocation, std for targets with an operating system or equivalent layer of system-provided functionality), but may leave some code unimplemented (either unavailable or stubbed out as appropriate), whether because the target makes it impossible to implement or challenging to implement. The authors of pull requests are not obligated to avoid calling any portions of the standard library on the basis of a tier 3 target not implementing those portions.
This initial PR only contains a compiler target definition to teach the `cc` crate about this target. Porting the standard library is the next step for this target.
> The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how to build for the target, using cross-compilation if possible. If the target supports running binaries, or running tests (even if they do not pass), the documentation must explain how to run such binaries or tests for the target, using emulation if possible or dedicated hardware if necessary.
This target is documented in `src/doc/rustc/src/platform-support/armv7a-vex-v5.md`.
> Tier 3 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or other developers in the community, to maintain 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 a tier 3 target. Do not send automated messages or notifications (via any medium, including via @) to a PR author or others involved with a PR regarding a tier 3 target, unless they have opted into such messages.
>
> Backlinks such as those generated by the issue/PR tracker when linking to an issue or PR are not considered a violation of this policy, within reason. However, such messages (even on a separate repository) must not generate notifications to anyone involved with a PR who has not requested such notifications.
I understand and assent.
> Patches adding or updating tier 3 targets must not break any existing tier 2 or tier 1 target, and must not knowingly break another tier 3 target without approval of either the compiler team or the maintainers of the other tier 3 target.
>
> In particular, this may come up when working on closely related targets, such as variations of the same architecture with different features. Avoid introducing unconditional uses of features that another variation of the target may not have; use conditional compilation or runtime detection, as appropriate, to let each target run code supported by that target.
I understand and assent.
> Tier 3 targets must be able to produce assembly using at least one of rustc's supported backends from any host target. (Having support in a fork of the backend is not sufficient, it must be upstream.)
`armv7a-vex-v5` has nearly identical codegen to `armv7a-none-eabihf`, so this is not an issue.
> If a tier 3 target stops meeting these requirements, or the target maintainers no longer have interest or time, or the target shows no signs of activity and has not built for some time, or removing the target would improve the quality of the Rust codebase, we may post a PR to remove it; any such PR will be CCed to the target maintainers (and potentially other people who have previously worked on the target), to check potential interest in improving the situation.
I understand.
Co-authored-by: Max Niederman <max@maxniederman.com>
Co-authored-by: Tropical <42101043+Tropix126@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Gavin Niederman <gavinniederman@gmail.com>
Make tier 3 musl targets link dynamically by default
Since we don't build std for these and don't provide any support for them, these can trivially be changed to link dynamically by default.
This is a feature used by LLVM that is enabled for our `aarch64-linux`
targets, which we would like to configure on in `std`. Thus, mark
`outline-atomics` a known feature. It is left unstable for now.
Add support for the m68k architecture in 'object_architecture'
This is a tiny PR that adds the m68k architecture to `object_architecture`. This allows us to build rmeta files for that ISA(we use the object crate to pack metadata into object files).
Enable outline-atomics for aarch64-unknown-linux-musl
They were disabled in bd287fa5084f2e153c1044632f9f3d190f090d69 and haven't been causing problems for a while anymore, see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/89626 for details.
The entire testsuite still passes on `aarch64-unknown-linux-musl` with this feature enabled.
They were disabled in bd287fa5084f2e153c1044632f9f3d190f090d69 and haven't been
causing problems for a while anymore.
The entire testsuite still passes on aarch64-unknown-linux-musl with this feature
enabled.
Signed-off-by: Jens Reidel <adrian@travitia.xyz>
Since we don't build std for these and don't provide any support for
them, these can trivially be changed to link dynamically by default.
Signed-off-by: Jens Reidel <adrian@travitia.xyz>
Use serde for target spec json deserialize
The previous manual parsing of `serde_json::Value` was a lot of complicated code and extremely error-prone. It was full of janky behavior like sometimes ignoring type errors, sometimes erroring for type errors, sometimes warning for type errors, and sometimes just ICEing for type errors (the icing on the top).
Additionally, many of the error messages about allowed values were out of date because they were in a completely different place than the FromStr impls. Overall, the system caused confusion for users.
I also found the old deserialization code annoying to read. Whenever a `key!` invocation was found, one had to first look for the right macro arm, and no go to definition could help.
This PR replaces all this manual parsing with a 2-step process involving serde.
First, the string is parsed into a `TargetSpecJson` struct. This struct is a 1:1 representation of the spec JSON. It already parses all the enums and is very simple to read and write.
Then, the fields from this struct are copied into the actual `Target`. The reason for this two-step process instead of just serializing into a `Target` is because of a few reasons
1. There are a few transformations performed between the two formats
2. The default logic is implemented this way. Otherwise all the default field values would have to be spelled out again, which is suboptimal. With this logic, they fall out naturally, because everything in the json struct is an `Option`.
Overall, the mapping is pretty simple, with the vast majority of fields just doing a 1:1 mapping that is captured by two macros. I have deliberately avoided making the macros generic to keep them simple.
All the `FromStr` impls now have the error message right inside them, which increases the chance of it being up to date. Some "`from_str`" impls were turned into proper `FromStr` impls to support this.
The new code is much less involved, delegating all the JSON parsing logic to serde, without any manual type matching.
This change introduces a few breaking changes for consumers. While it is possible to use this format on stable, it is very much subject to change, so breaking changes are expected. The hope is also that because of the way stricter behavior, breaking changes are easier to deal with, as they come with clearer error messages.
1. Invalid types now always error, everywhere. Previously, they would sometimes error, and sometimes just be ignored (which meant the users JSON was still broken, just silently!)
2. This now makes use of `deny_unknown_fields` instead of just warning on unused fields, which was done previously. Serde doesn't make it easy to get such warning behavior, which was the primary reason that this now changed. But I think error behavior is very reasonable too. If someone has random stale fields in their JSON, it is likely because these fields did something at some point but no longer do, and the user likely wants to be informed of this so they can figure out what to do.
This is also relevant for the future. If we remove a field but someone has it set, it probably makes sense for them to take a look whether they need this and should look for alternatives, or whether they can just delete it. Overall, the JSON is made more explicit.
This is the only expected breakage, but there could also be small breakage from small mistakes. All targets roundtrip though, so it can't be anything too major.
fixesrust-lang/rust#144153
The previous manual parsing of `serde_json::Value` was a lot of
complicated code and extremely error-prone. It was full of janky
behavior like sometimes ignoring type errors, sometimes erroring for
type errors, sometimes warning for type errors, and sometimes just
ICEing for type errors (the icing on the top).
Additionally, many of the error messages about allowed values were out
of date because they were in a completely different place than the
FromStr impls. Overall, the system caused confusion for users.
I also found the old deserialization code annoying to read. Whenever a
`key!` invocation was found, one had to first look for the right macro
arm, and no go to definition could help.
This PR replaces all this manual parsing with a 2-step process involving
serde.
First, the string is parsed into a `TargetSpecJson` struct. This struct
is a 1:1 representation of the spec JSON. It already parses all the
enums and is very simple to read and write.
Then, the fields from this struct are copied into the actual `Target`.
The reason for this two-step process instead of just serializing into a
`Target` is because of a few reasons
1. There are a few transformations performed between the two formats
2. The default logic is implemented this way. Otherwise all the default
field values would have to be spelled out again, which is
suboptimal. With this logic, they fall out naturally, because
everything in the json struct is an `Option`.
Overall, the mapping is pretty simple, with the vast majority of fields
just doing a 1:1 mapping that is captured by two macros. I have
deliberately avoided making the macros generic to keep them simple.
All the `FromStr` impls now have the error message right inside them,
which increases the chance of it being up to date. Some "`from_str`"
impls were turned into proper `FromStr` impls to support this.
The new code is much less involved, delegating all the JSON parsing
logic to serde, without any manual type matching.
This change introduces a few breaking changes for consumers. While it is
possible to use this format on stable, it is very much subject to
change, so breaking changes are expected. The hope is also that because
of the way stricter behavior, breaking changes are easier to deal with,
as they come with clearer error messages.
1. Invalid types now always error, everywhere. Previously, they would
sometimes error, and sometimes just be ignored (which meant the users
JSON was still broken, just silently!)
2. This now makes use of `deny_unknown_fields` instead of just warning
on unused fields, which was done previously. Serde doesn't make it
easy to get such warning behavior, which was the primary reason that
this now changed. But I think error behavior is very reasonable too.
If someone has random stale fields in their JSON, it is likely
because these fields did something at some point but no longer do,
and the user likely wants to be informed of this so they can figure
out what to do.
This is also relevant for the future. If we remove a field but
someone has it set, it probably makes sense for them to take a look
whether they need this and should look for alternatives, or whether
they can just delete it. Overall, the JSON is made more explicit.
This is the only expected breakage, but there could also be small
breakage from small mistakes. All targets roundtrip though, so it can't
be anything too major.
Enable xgot feature for mips64 musl targets
This was missed in b65c2afdfd9aaee977302516c9ef177861abfe74, which only enabled it for the glibc targets.
I didn't feel comfortable touching the OpenWRT target, whoever maintains that will probably want to take a look whether it is necessary there as well.
This stabilizes a subset of the `-Clinker-features` components on x64 linux:
the lld opt-out.
The opt-in is not stabilized, as interactions with other stable flags require
more internal work, but are not needed for stabilizing using rust-lld by default.
Similarly, since we only switch to rust-lld on x64 linux, the opt-out is
only stabilized there. Other targets still require `-Zunstable-options`
to use it.
Allow custom default address spaces and parse `p-` specifications in the datalayout string
Some targets, such as CHERI, use as default an address space different from the "normal" default address space `0` (in the case of CHERI, [200 is used](https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/techreports/UCAM-CL-TR-877.pdf)). Currently, `rustc` does not allow to specify custom address spaces and does not take into consideration [`p-` specifications in the datalayout string](https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#langref-datalayout).
This patch tries to mitigate these problems by allowing targets to define a custom default address space (while keeping the default value to address space `0`) and adding the code to parse the `p-` specifications in `rustc_abi`. The main changes are that `TargetDataLayout` now uses functions to refer to pointer-related informations, instead of having specific fields for the size and alignment of pointers in the default address space; furthermore, the two `pointer_size` and `pointer_align` fields in `TargetDataLayout` are replaced with an `FxHashMap` that holds info for all the possible address spaces, as parsed by the `p-` specifications.
The potential performance drawbacks of not having ad-hoc fields for the default address space will be tested in this PR's CI run.
r? workingjubilee
This was missed in b65c2afdfd9aaee977302516c9ef177861abfe74, which only
enabled it for the glibc targets.
I didn't feel comfortable touching the OpenWRT target, whoever maintains
that will probably want to take a look whether it is necessary there as
well.
Signed-off-by: Jens Reidel <adrian@travitia.xyz>
setup typos check in CI
This allows to check typos in CI, currently for compiler only (to reduce commit size with fixes). With current setup, exclude list is quite short, so it worth trying?
Also includes commits with actual typo fixes.
MCP: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/817
typos check currently turned for:
* ./compiler
* ./library
* ./src/bootstrap
* ./src/librustdoc
After merging, PRs which enables checks for other crates (tools) can be implemented too.
Found typos will **not break** other jobs immediately: (tests, building compiler for perf run). Job will be marked as red on completion in ~ 20 secs, so you will not forget to fix it whenever you want, before merging pr.
Check typos: `python x.py test tidy --extra-checks=spellcheck`
Apply typo fixes: `python x.py test tidy --extra-checks=spellcheck:fix` (in case if there only 1 suggestion of each typo)
Current fail in this pr is expected and shows how typo errors emitted. Commit with error will be removed after r+.
make `tidy-alphabetical` use a natural sort
The idea here is that these lines should be correctly sorted, even though a naive string comparison would say they are not:
```
foo2
foo10
```
This is the ["natural sort order"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_sort_order).
There is more discussion in [#t-compiler/help > tidy natural sort](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/182449-t-compiler.2Fhelp/topic/tidy.20natural.20sort/with/519111079)
Unfortunately, no standard sorting tools are smart enough to to this automatically (casting some doubt on whether we should make this change). Here are some sort outputs:
```
> cat foo.txt | sort
foo
foo1
foo10
foo2
mp
mp1e2
np",
np1e2",
> cat foo.txt | sort -n
foo
foo1
foo10
foo2
mp
mp1e2
np",
np1e2",
> cat foo.txt | sort -V
foo
foo1
foo2
foo10
mp
mp1e2
np1e2",
np",
```
Disappointingly, "numeric" sort does not actually have the behavior we want. It only sorts by numeric value if the line starts with a number. The "version" sort looks promising, but does something very unintuitive if you look at the final 4 values. None of the other options seem to have the desired behavior in all cases:
```
-b, --ignore-leading-blanks ignore leading blanks
-d, --dictionary-order consider only blanks and alphanumeric characters
-f, --ignore-case fold lower case to upper case characters
-g, --general-numeric-sort compare according to general numerical value
-i, --ignore-nonprinting consider only printable characters
-M, --month-sort compare (unknown) < 'JAN' < ... < 'DEC'
-h, --human-numeric-sort compare human readable numbers (e.g., 2K 1G)
-n, --numeric-sort compare according to string numerical value
-R, --random-sort shuffle, but group identical keys. See shuf(1)
--random-source=FILE get random bytes from FILE
-r, --reverse reverse the result of comparisons
--sort=WORD sort according to WORD:
general-numeric -g, human-numeric -h, month -M,
numeric -n, random -R, version -V
-V, --version-sort natural sort of (version) numbers within text
```
r? ```@Noratrieb``` (it sounded like you know this code?)
Add target features for sm_* and ptx*, both of which form a partial
order, but cannot be combined to a single partial order. These mirror
the LLVM target features, but we do not provide LLVM target
processors (which imply both an sm_* and ptx* feature).
Add some documentation for the nvptx target.
