Inline function to avoid naming confusion.
Fixes the non-RFC requiring portion of #18394. The suggestion for a new token there probably needs to either be refiled onto rust-lang/rfcs if it's still relevant (may not be given Macros 2.0 work, not sure).
Move the reference into a submodule
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/39588
This moves the reference out into its own submodule. Right now, it's under my own account; I would assume that it should go under `rust-lang`, but I guess there's an argument for the nursery too? I can fix that up before we commit it.
r? @alexcrichton @brson
Let `-Crelocation-model` better control `-pie` linking
Prior to this, if relocation model in the target options was "pic", as
most targets have it, then the user's `-Crelocation-model` had no effect
on whether `-pie` would be used. Only `-Clink-arg=-static` would have a
further override here.
Now we use `context::get_reloc_model`, which gives precedence to the
user's option, and if it's `RelocMode::PIC` we enable `-pie`. This is
the same test as `context::is_pie_binary`, except that folds across all
`sess.crate_types`, not just the current one.
Fixes#35061.
rustbuild: Add support for compiling Cargo
This commit adds support to rustbuild for compiling Cargo as part of the release
process. Previously rustbuild would simply download a Cargo snapshot and
repackage it. With this change we should be able to turn off artifacts from the
rust-lang/cargo repository and purely rely on the artifacts Cargo produces here.
The infrastructure added here is intended to be extensible to other components,
such as the RLS. It won't exactly be a one-line addition, but the addition of
Cargo didn't require too much hooplah anyway.
The process for release Cargo will now look like:
* The rust-lang/rust repository has a Cargo submodule which is used to build a
Cargo to pair with the rust-lang/rust release
* Periodically we'll update the cargo submodule as necessary on rust-lang/rust's
master branch
* When branching beta we'll create a new branch of Cargo (as we do today), and
the first commit to the beta branch will be to update the Cargo submodule to
this exact revision.
* When branching stable, we'll ensure that the Cargo submodule is updated and
then make a stable release.
Backports to Cargo will look like:
* Send a PR to cargo's master branch
* Send a PR to cargo's release branch (e.g. rust-1.16.0)
* Send a PR to rust-lang/rust's beta branch updating the submodule
* Eventually send a PR to rust-lang/rust's master branch updating the submodule
For reference, the process to add a new component to the rust-lang/rust release
would look like:
* Add `$foo` as a submodule in `src/tools`
* Add a `tool-$foo` step which compiles `$foo` with the specified compiler,
likely mirroring what Cargo does.
* Add a `dist-$foo` step which uses `src/tools/$foo` and the `tool-$foo` output
to create a rust-installer package for `$foo` likely mirroring what Cargo
does.
* Update the `dist-extended` step with a new dependency on `dist-$foo`
* Update `src/tools/build-manifest` for the new component.
Prior to this, if relocation model in the target options was "pic", as
most targets have it, then the user's `-Crelocation-model` had no effect
on whether `-pie` would be used. Only `-Clink-arg=-static` would have a
further override here.
Now we use `context::get_reloc_model`, which gives precedence to the
user's option, and if it's `RelocMode::PIC` we enable `-pie`. This is
the same test as `context::is_pie_binary`, except that folds across all
`sess.crate_types`, not just the current one.
This commit adds support to rustbuild for compiling Cargo as part of the release
process. Previously rustbuild would simply download a Cargo snapshot and
repackage it. With this change we should be able to turn off artifacts from the
rust-lang/cargo repository and purely rely on the artifacts Cargo produces here.
The infrastructure added here is intended to be extensible to other components,
such as the RLS. It won't exactly be a one-line addition, but the addition of
Cargo didn't require too much hooplah anyway.
The process for release Cargo will now look like:
* The rust-lang/rust repository has a Cargo submodule which is used to build a
Cargo to pair with the rust-lang/rust release
* Periodically we'll update the cargo submodule as necessary on rust-lang/rust's
master branch
* When branching beta we'll create a new branch of Cargo (as we do today), and
the first commit to the beta branch will be to update the Cargo submodule to
this exact revision.
* When branching stable, we'll ensure that the Cargo submodule is updated and
then make a stable release.
Backports to Cargo will look like:
* Send a PR to cargo's master branch
* Send a PR to cargo's release branch (e.g. rust-1.16.0)
* Send a PR to rust-lang/rust's beta branch updating the submodule
* Eventually send a PR to rust-lang/rust's master branch updating the submodule
For reference, the process to add a new component to the rust-lang/rust release
would look like:
* Add `$foo` as a submodule in `src/tools`
* Add a `tool-$foo` step which compiles `$foo` with the specified compiler,
likely mirroring what Cargo does.
* Add a `dist-$foo` step which uses `src/tools/$foo` and the `tool-$foo` output
to create a rust-installer package for `$foo` likely mirroring what Cargo
does.
* Update the `dist-extended` step with a new dependency on `dist-$foo`
* Update `src/tools/build-manifest` for the new component.
In MIR construction, operands need to live exactly until they are used,
which is during the (sub)expression that made the call to `as_operand`.
Before this PR, operands lived until the end of the temporary scope,
which was sometimes unnecessarily longer and sometimes too short.
Fixes#38669.
Reduce std_unicode’s public API
* Only keep one copy of the `UTF8_CHAR_WIDTH` table instead of one of each of libcore and libstd_unicode.
* Move the `utf8_char_width` function to `core::str` under the `str_internals` unstable feature.
* Remove `std_unicode::str::is_utf16`. It was only accessible through the `#[unstable]` crate std_unicode. It has never been used in the compiler or standard library since 47e7a05 added it in 2012 “for OS API interop”. It can be replaced with a one-liner:
```rust
fn is_utf16(slice: &[u16]) -> bool {
std::char::decode_utf16(s).all(|r| r.is_ok())
}
```
convert AdtDef::destructor to on-demand
This removes the `Cell` from `AdtDef`. Also, moving destructor validity
checking to on-demand (forced during item-type checking) ensures that
invalid destructors can't cause ICEs.
Fixes#38868.
Fixes#40132.
r? @eddyb
rustbuild: use deterministic step ordering and respect path order on the command-line.
Restores similar behavior to `make` rules, where:
* the step order was always the same, e.g. the testsuite order in `make check`
* `make check-stage1-{cfail,rpass}` would *always* run `cfail` before `rpass`
* `./x.py test--stage 1 src/test/{compile-fail,run-pass}` is now equivalent
r? @alexcrichton
transition borrowck to visit all **bodies** and not item-likes
This is a better structure for incremental compilation and also more compatible with the eventual borrowck mir. It also fixes#38520 as a drive-by fix.
r? @eddyb
This reduces the number of dynamic drops in libstd from 1141 to 899.
However, without this change, the next patch would have created much
more dynamic drops.
A basic merge unswitching hack reduced the number of dynamic drops to
644, with no effect on stack usage. I should be writing a more dedicated
drop unswitching pass.
No performance measurements.
std::process for fuchsia: updated to latest liblaunchpad
Our liblaunchpad changed a bit and so fuchsia's std::process impl needs to change a bit.
@raphlinus
Implement function-like procedural macros ( `#[proc_macro]`)
Adds the `#[proc_macro]` attribute, which expects bare functions of the kind `fn(TokenStream) -> TokenStream`, which can be invoked like `my_macro!()`.
cc rust-lang/rfcs#1913, #38356
r? @jseyfried
cc @nrc
Panic on errors in `format!` or `<T: Display>::to_string`
… instead of silently ignoring a result.
`fmt::Write for String` never returns `Err`, so implementations of `Display` (or other traits of that family) never should either.
Fixes#40103
Add support for the x86-interrupt calling convention
This calling convention can be used for definining interrupt handlers on 32-bit and 64-bit x86 targets. The compiler then uses `iret` instead of `ret` for returning and ensures that all registers are restored to their
original values.
Usage:
```rust
extern "x86-interrupt" fn handler(stack_frame: &ExceptionStackFrame) {…}
```
for interrupts and exceptions without error code and
```rust
extern "x86-interrupt" fn handler_with_err_code(stack_frame: &ExceptionStackFrame,
error_code: u64) {…}
```
for exceptions that push an error code (e.g., page faults or general protection faults). The programmer must ensure that the correct version is used for each interrupt.
For more details see the [LLVM PR][1] and the corresponding [proposal][2].
[1]: https://reviews.llvm.org/D15567
[2]: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2015-September/045171.html
It is also possible to implement interrupt handlers on x86 through [naked functions](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/1201-naked-fns.md). In fact, almost all existing Rust OS projects for x86 use naked functions for this, including [Redox](b9793deb59/arch/x86_64/src/lib.rs (L109-L147)), [IntermezzOS](f959cc18c7/interrupts/src/lib.rs (L28-L72)), and [blog_os](844d739379/src/interrupts/mod.rs (L49-L64)). So support for the `x86-interrupt` calling convention isn't absolutely needed.
However, it has a number of benefits to naked functions:
- **No inline assembly needed**: [Inline assembly](https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/inline-assembly.html) is highly unstable and dangerous. It's pretty easy to mess things up. Also, it uses an arcane syntax and requires that the programmer knows x86 assembly.
- **Higher performance**: A naked wrapper function always saves _all_ registers before calling the Rust function. This isn't needed for a compiler supported calling convention, since the compiler knows which registers are clobbered by the interrupt handler. Thus, only these registers need to be saved and restored.
- **Safer interfaces**: We can write a `set_handler` function that takes a `extern "x86-interrupt" fn(&ExceptionStackFrame)` and the compiler ensures that we always use the right function type for all handler functions. This isn't possible with the `#[naked]` attribute.
- **More convenient**: Instead of writing [tons of assembly boilerplate](b9793deb59/arch/x86_64/src/lib.rs (L109-L147)) and desperately trying to improve things [through macros](844d739379/src/interrupts/mod.rs (L17-L92)), we can just write [code like this](e6a61f9507/src/interrupts/mod.rs (L85-L89)).
- **Naked functions are unreliable**: It is allowed to use Rust code inside a naked function, which sometimes works and sometimes not. For example, [calling a function](b9793deb59/arch/x86_64/src/lib.rs (L132)) through Rust code seems to work fine without function prologue, but [code declaring a variable](https://is.gd/NQYXqE) silently adds a prologue even though the function is naked (look at the generated assembly, there is a `movl` instruction before the `nop`).
**Edit**: See the [tracking issue](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/40180) for an updated list of issues.
Unfortunately, the implementation of the `x86-interrupt` calling convention in LLVM has some issues that make it unsuitable for 64-bit kernels at the moment:
- LLVM always tries to backup the `xmm` registers on 64-bit platforms even if the target doesn't support SSE. This leads to invalid opcode exceptions whenever an interrupt handler is invoked. I submitted a fix to LLVM in [D29959](https://reviews.llvm.org/D29959). The fix is really small (<10 lines), so maybe we could backport it to [Rust's LLVM fork](https://github.com/rust-lang/llvm)?. **Edit**: The fix was merged to LLVM trunk in [rL295347](https://reviews.llvm.org/rL295347). Backported in https://github.com/rust-lang/llvm/pull/63.
- On targets with SSE support, LLVM uses the `movaps` instruction for saving the `xmm` registers, which requires an alignment of 16. For handlers with error codes, however, the stack alignment is only 8, so a alignment exception occurs. This issue is tracked in [bug 26413](https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26413). ~~Unfortunately, I don't know enough about LLVM to fix this.~~ **Edit**: Fix submitted in [D30049](https://reviews.llvm.org/D30049).
This PR adds experimental support for this calling convention under the `abi_x86_interrupt` feature gate. The implementation is very similar to #38465 and was surprisingly simple :).
There is no accepted RFC for this change. In fact, the [RFC for interrupt calling convention](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1275) from 2015 was closed in favor of naked functions. However, the reactions to the recent [PR](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/38465) for a MSP430 interrupt calling convention were [in favor of experimental interrupt ABIs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/38465#issuecomment-270015470).
- [x] Add compile-fail tests for the feature gate.
- [x] Create tracking issue for the `abi_x86_interrupt` feature (and link it in code). **Edit**: Tracking issue: #40180
- [x] Backport [rL295347](https://reviews.llvm.org/rL295347) to Rust's LLVM fork. **Edit**: Done in https://github.com/rust-lang/llvm/pull/63
@tari @steveklabnik @jackpot51 @ticki @hawkw @thepowersgang, you might be interested in this.
