Technically, there are requirements imposed by the LLVM
`AMDGPUTargetMachine` on functions with this ABI (eg, the return type
must be void), but I'm unsure exactly where this should be enforced.
Preliminary work for incremental ThinLTO.
Since implementing incremental ThinLTO is a bit more involved than I initially thought, I'm splitting out some of the things that already work. This PR (1) adds a way accessing some ThinLTO information in `rustc` and (2) does some cleanup around CGU/object file naming (which makes things quite a bit nicer).
This is probably best reviewed one commit at a time.
Don't silently ignore invalid data in target spec
This is technically a breaking change, but only because invalid data was previously silently being ignored.
task: remove wrong comments about non-existent LocalWake trait
~~A `LocalWaker` is specifically `!Send `, and the unsafety comment around
`LocalWaker::new` only specifies that it be safe to call `wake_local`.
One could then accidentally promote a `LocalWaker` into a `Waker`, which
is universally `Send`, simply via `Waker::from(local_waker)`. A
`LocalWaker` the was built expecting to not be `Send`, such as using
`Rc`, could be sent to other threads safely.~~
~~Separately, though somewhat related, `Context` holds a `&LocalWaker`
internally, and exposes a `waker() -> &Waker` method. This simply
transmutes the `&LocalWaker` to `&Waker`, which would be unsound, except
that you can't "send" a `&Waker`, you'd need to clone it first. Since
`UnsafeWake::clone_raw` requires that it return a `Waker`, the transmute
is not unsound. The transmuted `LocalWaker` will be promoted to a
`Waker` correctly.~~
~~That would mean that if `UnsafeWake::clone_raw` were to be changed, such
as returning `Self` instead of `Waker`, this would no longer be sound.
Thus, this also adds a comment to `clone_raw` to remember this.~~
r? @cramertj
Deny bare trait objects in the rest of rust
Add `#![deny(bare_trait_objects)]` to all the modules not covered before (those did not require code changes) that I consider applicable (I left out shims) in order to futureproof them.
Provide llvm-strip in llvm-tools component
Shipping this tool gives people reliable way to reduce the generated executable size.
I'm not sure if this strip tool is available from the llvm version current rust is built on. But let's take a look. @japaric
NLL: Suggest `ref mut` and `&mut self`
Fixes#51244. Supersedes #51249, I think.
Under the old lexical lifetimes, the compiler provided helpful suggestions about adding `mut` when you tried to mutate a variable bound as `&self` or (explicit) `ref`. NLL doesn't have those suggestions yet. This pull request adds them.
I didn't bother making the help text exactly the same as without NLL, but I can if that's important.
(Originally this was supposed to be part of #51612, but I got bogged down trying to fit everything in one PR.)
The syntactical expansion of `#[proc_macro]` and related attributes currently
contains absolute paths which conflicts with a lint for the 2018 edition,
causing issues like #52214. This commit puts a band-aid on the issue by ensuring
that procedural macros can also migrate to the 2018 edition for now by tweaking
the expansion based on what features are activated. A more long-term solution
would probably tweak the edition hygiene of spans, but this should do the trick
for now.
Closes#52214
nll experiment: compute SCCs instead of iterative region solving
This is an attempt to speed up region solving by replacing the current iterative dataflow with a SCC computation. The idea is to detect cycles (SCCs) amongst region constraints and then compute just one value per cycle. The graph with all cycles removed is of course a DAG, so we can then solve constraints "bottom up" once the liveness values are known.
I kinda ran out of time this morning so the last commit is a bit sloppy but I wanted to get this posted, let travis run on it, and maybe do a perf run, before I clean it up.
Change RangeInclusive to a three-field struct.
Fix#45222.
This PR also reverts #48012 (i.e. removed the `try_fold`/`try_rfold` specialization for `RangeInclusive`) because LLVM no longer has trouble recognizing a RangeInclusive loop.
Use fast TLS on Fuchsia
I'm not sure why Fuchsia was separated here, but we provide these symbols, and tests are passing in QEMU with this change. cc @raphlinus.
r? @alexcrichton
