bors c02a4f0852 Auto merge of #139309 - RalfJung:abi_unsupported_vector_types, r=fee1-dead,traviscross
make abi_unsupported_vector_types a hard error

Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116558 by completing the transition; see that issue for context. The lint was introduced with Rust 1.84 and this has been shown in cargo's future breakage reports since Rust 1.85, released 6 weeks ago, and so far we got 0 complaints by users. There's not even a backlink on the tracking issue. We did a [crater run](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/127731#issuecomment-2286736295) when the lint was originally added and found no breakage. So I don't think we need another crater run now, but I can do one if the team prefers that.

https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131800 is done, so for most current targets (in particular, all tier 1 and tier 2 targets) we have the information to implement this check (modulo the targets where we don't properly support SIMD vectors yet, see the sub-issues of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116558). If a new target gets added in the future, it will default to reject all SIMD vector types until proper information is added, which is the default we want.

This will need approval by for `@rust-lang/lang.` Cc `@workingjubilee` `@veluca93`

try-job: test-various
try-job: armhf-gnu
try-job: dist-i586-gnu-i586-i686-musl
2025-04-24 00:44:40 +00:00
..
2025-04-07 07:11:52 -04:00
2025-04-06 21:41:47 +02:00
2025-04-20 11:18:38 +02:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-04-20 11:18:38 +02:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-04-16 17:13:50 -04:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-02-03 10:39:32 -05:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-04-20 11:18:38 +02:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00
2025-03-02 18:53:49 +00:00
2025-02-24 09:26:54 +00:00

The files here use the LLVM FileCheck framework, documented at https://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/FileCheck.html.

One extension worth noting is the use of revisions as custom prefixes for FileCheck. If your codegen test has different behavior based on the chosen target or different compiler flags that you want to exercise, you can use a revisions annotation, like so:

// revisions: aaa bbb
// [bbb] compile-flags: --flags-for-bbb

After specifying those variations, you can write different expected, or explicitly unexpected output by using <prefix>-SAME: and <prefix>-NOT:, like so:

// CHECK: expected code
// aaa-SAME: emitted-only-for-aaa
// aaa-NOT:                        emitted-only-for-bbb
// bbb-NOT:  emitted-only-for-aaa
// bbb-SAME:                       emitted-only-for-bbb