Add `riscv64gc-unknown-hermit` target
This PR adds the new `riscv64gc-unknown-hermit` target, initially created by `@simonschoening,` a 64-bit RISC-V target for the [Hermit] unikernel project.
Furthermore, this cleans up the existing Hermit targets and adds a platform support documentation page for _all_ Hermit targets and goes through the new tier 3 target policy process:
[Hermit]: https://github.com/hermitcore
## 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.)
`@stlankes` as the Hermit project lead and I will be the target maintainers.
> - 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 `riscv64gc-unknown-hermit` was derived from the existing `x86_64-unknown-hermit` and `aarch64-unknown-hermit` targets.
> - 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.
No dependencies were added to Rust.
> - 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.
Understood.
I am not a member of a Rust team.
> - 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.
Understood.
`std` is supported.
> - 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.
Building is described in the platform support doc.
> - 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.
Understood.
> - 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 don't think this PR breaks anything.
r? compiler-team
Reuse `codegen_ssa` monomorphization errors in `codegen_gcc`
Removes monomorphization errors duplication by reusing the ones defined in `codegen_ssa`.
Also updates `expected_simd` errors usage in `codegen_gcc` by assuming we want to treat those parameters as translatable. See 7a888fb56e
These pre-link args are remains from Hermit's old C version.
We don't need them and we have no reason to override the defaults here.
See ld [1] for details.
[1]: https://sourceware.org/binutils/docs/ld/Options.html
Signed-off-by: Martin Kröning <martin.kroening@eonerc.rwth-aachen.de>
rust-installer: Use env(1) in the shebang.
This fixes the case (e.g. *BSD) where bash is installed on the host system, but not at the typical location of /bin.
Fix #[inline(always)] on closures with target feature 1.1
Fixes#108655. I think this is the most obvious solution that isn't overly complicated. The comment includes more justification, but I think this is likely better than demoting the `#[inline(always)]` to `#[inline]`, since existing code is unaffected.
Support interpolated block for `try` and `async`
I'm putting this up for T-lang discussion, to decide whether or not they feel like this should be supported. This was raised in #112952, which surprised me. There doesn't seem to be a *technical* reason why we don't support this.
### Precedent:
This is supported:
```rust
macro_rules! always {
($block:block) => {
if true $block
}
}
fn main() {
always!({});
}
```
### Counterpoint:
However, for context, this is *not* supported:
```rust
macro_rules! unsafe_block {
($block:block) => {
unsafe $block
}
}
fn main() {
unsafe_block!({});
}
```
If this support for `async` and `try` with interpolated blocks is *not* desirable, then I can convert them to instead the same diagnostic as `unsafe $block` and make this situation a lot less ambiguous.
----
I'll try to write up more before T-lang triage on Tuesday. I couldn't find anything other than #69760 for why something like `unsafe $block` is not supported, and even that PR doesn't have much information.
Fixes#112952
Remove Scope::Elision from bound-vars resolution.
This scope is a remnant of HIR-based lifetime resolution.
It's only role was to ensure that object lifetime resolution falled back to `'static`. This can be done using `ObjectLifetimeDefault` scope.
Get rid of subst-relate incompleteness in new solver
We shouldn't need subst-relate if we have bidirectional-normalizes-to in the new solver.
The only potential issue may happen if we have an unconstrained projection like `<Wrapper<?0> as Trait>::Assoc == <Wrapper<T> as Trait>::Assoc` where they both normalize to something that doesn't mention any substs, which would possibly prefer `?0 = T` if we fall back to subst-relate. But I'd prefer if we remove incompleteness until we can determine some case where we need them, and the bidirectional-normalizes-to seems better to have in general.
I can update https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/26 and https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/25 once this lands.
r? `@lcnr`
