Add the basics to get the operating system running, including how to
exit the operating system.
Since Xous has no libc, there is no default entrypoint. Add a `_start`
entrypoint to the system-specific os module.
Signed-off-by: Sean Cross <sean@xobs.io>
Xous has no C FFI. Instead, all FFI is done via syscalls that are
specified in Rust. Add these FFI calls to libstd, as well as some of the
currently-supported syscalls.
This enables Rust programs to interact with the Xous operating system
while avoiding adding an extra dependency to libstd.
Signed-off-by: Sean Cross <sean@xobs.io>
Add projection obligations when comparing impl too
Fixes#115033
In the test, when we ask for WF obligations of `DatasetIter<'a, ArrayBase<D>>`, we get back two important obligations: `[<D as Data>::Elem -> ?1, ?1: 'a]`. If we don't add the projection obligation, `?1` remains unconstrained.
An alternative solution would be to use unnormalized obligations, where we only have one relevant obligation: `<D as Data>::Elem: 'a`. This would leave no inference vars unconstrained.
fix help text for rust-analyzer.check.invocation{Strategy,Location}
I highly doubt that `check.invocationLocation` only has an effect if `cargo.buildScripts.overrideCommand` is set -- looks like a copy-paste mistake from `buildScripts.invocationLocation` to me.
feat: Implement extern crate completion
Hi, this is a draft PR for #13002.
I have basic completion working as well as a filter for existing extern crate imports in the same file. This is based on the tests, I have not actually tried this in an editor. Before going further I think this is a good point to stop and get feedback on the
structure and approach I have taken so far. Let me know what you think :)
I will make sure to add more tests, rebase commits and align with the code style guidelines before submitting a final version.
A few specific questions :
1. Is there a better way to check for matching suggestions? right now I just test if an extern crate name starts with the current
user input.
2. Am I creating the `CompletionItem` correctly? I noticed that `use_.rs` invokes a builder where as I do not.
3. When checking for existing extern crate imports the current implementation only looks at the current source file, is that sufficient?
Remove apple-alt dist build.
This removes the dist-x86_64-apple-alt build to reduce CI usage because I suspect nobody is using it. This builder is almost identical to the `dist-x86_64-apple` with the small difference that the latter adds `rust.lto=thin`, and I do not think that difference was intentional. The reason they are identical is because llvm assertions were disabled in #44610, but I did not see any discussion about the consequence that this made the alt build identical to the normal build. Perhaps because #44610 was intended to be temporary?
coverage: Give the instrumentor its own counter type, separate from MIR
Within the MIR representation of coverage data, `CoverageKind` is an important part of `StatementKind::Coverage`, but the `InstrumentCoverage` pass also uses it heavily as an internal data structure. This means that any change to `CoverageKind` also needs to update all of the internal parts of `InstrumentCoverage` that manipulate it directly, making the MIR representation difficult to modify.
---
This change fixes that by giving the instrumentor its own `BcbCounter` type for internal use, which is then converted to a `CoverageKind` when injecting coverage information into MIR.
The main change is mostly mechanical, because the initial `BcbCounter` is drop-in compatible with `CoverageKind`, minus the unnecessary `CoverageKind::Unreachable` variant.
I've then removed the `function_source_hash` field from `BcbCounter::Counter`, as a small example of how the two types can now usefully differ from each other. Every counter in a MIR-level function should have the same source hash, so we can supply the hash during the conversion to `CoverageKind::Counter` instead.
---
*Background:* BCB stands for “basic coverage block”, which is a node in the simplified control-flow graph used by coverage instrumentation. The instrumentor pass uses the function's actual MIR control-flow graph to build a simplified BCB graph, then assigns coverage counters and counter expressions to various nodes/edges in that simplified graph, and then finally injects corresponding coverage information into the underlying MIR.
Fix a stack overflow with long else if chains
This fixes stack overflows when running the `issue-74564-if-expr-stack-overflow.rs` test with the parallel compiler.
Add MIR validation for unwind out from nounwind functions + fixes to make validation pass
`@Nilstrieb` This is the MIR validation you asked in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/112403#discussion_r1222739722.
Two passes need to be fixed to get the validation to pass:
* `RemoveNoopLandingPads` currently unconditionally introduce a resume block (even there is none to begin with!), changed to not do that
* Generator state transform introduces a `assert` which may unwind, and its drop elaboration also introduces many new `UnwindAction`s, so in this case run the AbortUnwindingCalls after the transformation.
I believe this PR should also fixRust-for-Linux/linux#1016, cc `@ojeda`
r? `@Nilstrieb`
custom_mir: change Call() terminator syntax to something more readable
I find our current syntax very hard to read -- I cannot even remember the order of arguments, and having the "next block" *before* the actual function call is very counter-intuitive IMO. So I suggest we use `Call(ret_val = function(v), next_block)` instead.
r? `@JakobDegen`
Migrate GUI colors test to original CSS color format
Follow-up of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/111459.
This test needed more cleanup: first I removed duplication by using a function, then I merge similar rules which had the same values.
r? `@notriddle`
Ignore unexpected incr-comp session dirs
Clearly the code path can be hit without the presence of a compiler bug.
All it takes is mischief. See #71698.
Ignore problematic directories instead of ICE:ing. `continue`ing is
already done for problematic dirs in the code block above us.
Closes#71698.
With this fix, the output is this instead of ICE:
```
$ cargo +stage1 new gz-ice && cd gz-ice
$ cargo +stage1 build
$ find target -type f -exec gzip {} \;
$ cargo +stage1 run
Created binary (application) `gz-ice` package
Compiling gz-ice v0.1.0 (/tmp/gz-ice)
Finished dev [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.13s
gzip: target/debug/gz-ice has 1 other link -- unchanged
gzip: target/debug/deps/gz_ice-de919414dd9926b9 has 1 other link -- unchanged
Compiling gz-ice v0.1.0 (/tmp/gz-ice)
warning: failed to garbage collect invalid incremental compilation session directory `/tmp/gz-ice/target/debug/incremental/gz_ice-23qx9z9j9vghe/s-gnwd8daity-kp10sj.lock.gz`: Not a directory (os error 20)
warning: `gz-ice` (bin "gz-ice") generated 1 warning
Finished dev [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.13s
Running `target/debug/gz-ice`
Hello, world!
```
Fix UB in `std::sys::os::getenv()`
Fixes#114949.
Reduced the loops to 1k iterations (100k was taking way too long), Miri no longer shows any UB.
`@rustbot` label +A-process +C-bug +I-unsound +O-unix
Avoid side-effects from `try_coerce` when suggesting borrowing LHS of cast
The name `try_coerce` is a bit misleading -- it has side-effects, so when it's used in diagnostics code, it sometimes causes spurious obligations to be registered which cause other errors to occur that really make no sense in context.
Addendum: let's just rename `try_coerce` to `coerce` -- the `try_` part doesn't really add much, imo.
Normalize return type of `deduce_future_output_from_obligations`
Fixes#114909
Also confirmed to fix#114727 manually
Now that we have weak/lazy type aliases, we need to normalize those in future signatures to ensure that `replace_opaque_types_with_inference_vars` actually sees TAITs behind them. This isn't needed in the new solver, but added a test to make sure it doesn't regress there either.
r? types cc `@oli-obk` (who's gone, worst case can delay this PR until he's back)
Fix ABI flags in RISC-V/LoongArch ELF file generated by rustc
Fix#114153
It turns out the current way to set these flags are completely wrong. In LLVM the target ABI is used instead of target features to determine these flags.
Not sure how to write a test though. Or maybe a test isn't necessary because this affects only those touching target json?
r? `@Nilstrieb`
