Expand the LLVM coverage of `--print target-cpus`
We've been relying on a custom patch to add `MCSubtargetInfo::getCPUTable`
for `rustc --print target-cpus`, and just printing that it's not supported
on external LLVM builds. LLVM `main` now has `getAllProcessorDescriptions`
that can replace ours, so now we try to use that. In addition, the fallback
path can at least print the native and default cpu options.
There were also some mismatches in the function signatures here between
`LLVM_RUSTLLVM` and otherwise; this is now mitigated by sharing these
functions and only using cpp to adjust the function bodies.
Output LLVM optimization remark kind in `-Cremark` output
Since https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/90833, the optimization remark kind has not been printed. Therefore it wasn't possible to easily determine from the log (in a programmatic way) which remark kind was produced. I think that the most interesting remarks are the missed ones, which can lead users to some code optimization.
Maybe we could also change the format closer to the "old" one:
```
note: optimization remark for tailcallelim at /checkout/src/libcore/num/mod.rs:1:0: marked this call a tail call candidate
```
I wanted to programatically parse the remarks so that they could work e.g. with https://github.com/OfekShilon/optview2. However, now that I think about it, probably the proper solution is to tell rustc to output them to YAML and then use the YAML as input for the opt remark visualization tools. The flag for enabling this does not seem to work though (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/96705#issuecomment-1117632322).
Still I think that it's good to output the remark kind anyway, it's an important piece of information.
r? ```@tmiasko```
Fix the test directories suggested by `./x.py suggest`
It seems that these paths were correct when #106249 was being written, but since then #106458 has been merged (moving `src/test/` to `tests/`), making the tool's suggestions incorrect.
Remove aws cli install.
All runner images have the AWS CLI 2 installed, so there isn't a really strong reason to install our own version anymore.
The version we were installing was 1.27.122. The runner images currently have 2.11.x (the exact version varies by image).
I do not have the means to really test if the new version has any issues. I looked at all the `aws` commands, and none of them seem to be doing anything unusual. The page at https://docs.aws.amazon.com/cli/latest/userguide/cliv2-migration-changes.html contains a list of all the breaking changes, and I didn't see anything that looked important.
The lint that suggests `loop {}` instead of `while true {}` has functionality to 'pierce' parenthesis
in cases like `while (true) {}`. In these cases, the emitted span only went to the hi of the `true`
itself, not spanning the entire loop condition.
Before:
```
warning: denote infinite loops with `loop { ... }`
--> /tmp/foobar.rs:2:5
|
2 | while ((((((true)))))) {}
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: use `loop`
|
= note: `#[warn(while_true)]` on by default
```
After:
```
warning: denote infinite loops with `loop { ... }`
--> /tmp/foobar.rs:2:5
|
2 | while ((((((true)))))) {}
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: use `loop`
|
= note: `#[warn(while_true)]` on by default
```
Simplify event selection in TB diagnostics
As discussed previously, getting the range from `RangeMap` can make the filtering of events much simpler without any user-visible diff.
See minor exception in [<9d8fc00>](9d8fc00a4a) and decide how to resolve it
- add a boolean flag not to record events produced by deallocations ?
- add a `help: deallocation counts as an implicit write` ? (Note: could be generalized to also include `help: reborrow counts as an implicit read`)
- not bother and keep as-is ?
- something else ?
More robust debug assertions for `Instance::resolve` on built-in traits with non-standard trait items
In #111264, a user added a new item to the `Future` trait, but the code in [`resolve_associated_item`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_ty_utils/instance/fn.resolve_associated_item.html) implicitly assumes that the `Future` trait is defined with only one method (`Future::poll`) and treats the generator body as the implementation of that method.
This PR adds some debug assertions to make sure that that new methods defined on `Future`/`Generator`/etc. don't accidentally resolve to the wrong item when they are added, and adds a helpful comment guiding a compiler dev (or curious `#![no_core]` user) to what must be done to support adding new associated items to these built-in implementations.
I am open to discuss whether a test should be added, but I chose against it because I opted to make these `bug!()`s instead of, e.g., diagnostics or fatal errors. Arguably it doesn't need a test because it's not a bug that can be triggered by an end user, and internal-facing misuses of core kind of touch on rust-lang/compiler-team#620 -- however, I think the assertions I added in this PR are still a very useful way to make sure this bug doesn't waste debugging resources down the line.
Fixes#111264
add hint for =< as <=
Adds a compiler hint for when `=<` is typed instead of `<=`
Example hint:
```rust
fn foo() {
if 1 =< 3 {
println!("Hello, World!");
}
}
```
```
error: expected type, found `3`
--> main.rs:2:13
|
2 | if 1 =< 3 {
| -- ^ expected type
| |
| help: did you mean: `<=`
```
This PR only emits the suggestion if there is no space between the `=` and `<`. This hopefully narrows the scope of when this error is emitted, however this still allows this error to be emitted in cases such as this:
```
error: expected expression, found `;`
--> main.rs:2:18
|
2 | if 1 =< [i32;; 3]>::hello() {
| -- ^ expected expression
| |
| help: did you mean: `<=`
```
Which could be a good reason not to merge since I haven't been able to think of any other ways of narrowing the scope of this diagnostic.
closes#111128
debuginfo: split method declaration and definition
When we're adding a method to a type DIE, we only want a DW_AT_declaration
there, because LLVM LTO can't unify type definitions when a child DIE is a
full subprogram definition. Now the subprogram definition gets added at the
CU level with a specification link back to the abstract declaration.
Both GCC and Clang write debuginfo this way for C++ class methods.
Fixes#109730.
Fixes#109934.
Make the BUG_REPORT_URL configurable by tools
This greatly simplifies how hard it is to set a custom bug report url; previously tools had to copy
the entire hook implementation.
I haven't changed clippy in case they want to make the change upstream instead of the subtree, but
I'm happy to do so here if the maintainers want - cc ````@rust-lang/clippy````
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/109486.
Make the BUG_REPORT_URL configurable by tools
This greatly simplifies how hard it is to set a custom bug report url; previously tools had to copy
the entire hook implementation.
I haven't changed clippy in case they want to make the change upstream instead of the subtree, but
I'm happy to do so here if the maintainers want - cc ````@rust-lang/clippy````
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/109486.
Use fulfillment to check `Drop` impl compatibility
Use an `ObligationCtxt` to ensure that a `Drop` impl does not have stricter requirements than the ADT that it's implemented for, rather than using a `SimpleEqRelation` to (more or less) syntactically equate predicates on an ADT with predicates on an impl.
r? types
### Some background
The old code reads:
```rust
// An earlier version of this code attempted to do this checking
// via the traits::fulfill machinery. However, it ran into trouble
// since the fulfill machinery merely turns outlives-predicates
// 'a:'b and T:'b into region inference constraints. It is simpler
// just to look for all the predicates directly.
```
I'm not sure what this means, but perhaps in the 8 years since that this comment was written (cc #23638) it's gotten easier to process region constraints after doing fulfillment? I don't know how this logic differs from anything we do in the `compare_impl_item` module. Ironically, later on it says:
```rust
// However, it may be more efficient in the future to batch
// the analysis together via the fulfill (see comment above regarding
// the usage of the fulfill machinery), rather than the
// repeated `.iter().any(..)` calls.
```
Also:
* Removes `SimpleEqRelation` which was far too syntactical in its relation.
* Fixes#110557
Add `force` option for `--extern` flag
When `--extern force:foo=libfoo.so` is passed to `rustc` and `foo` is not actually used in the crate, ~inject an `extern crate foo;` statement into the AST~ force it to be resolved anyway in `CrateLoader::postprocess()`. This allows you to, for instance, inject a `#[panic_handler]` implementation into a `#![no_std]` crate without modifying its source so that it can be built as a `dylib`. It may also be useful for `#![panic_runtime]` or `#[global_allocator]`/`#![default_lib_allocator]` implementations.
My work previously involved integrating Rust into an existing C/C++ codebase which was built with Buck and shipped on, among other platforms, Android. When targeting Android, Buck builds all "native" code with shared linkage* so it can be loaded from Java/Kotlin. My project was not itself `#![no_std]`, but many of our dependencies were, and they would fail to build with shared linkage due to a lack of a panic handler. With this change, that project can add the new `force` option to the `std` dependency it already explicitly provides to every crate to solve this problem.
*This is an oversimplification - Buck has a couple features for aggregating dependencies into larger shared libraries, but none that I think sustainably solve this problem.
~The AST injection happens after macro expansion around where we similarly inject a test harness and proc-macro harness. The resolver's list of actually-used extern flags is populated during macro expansion, and if any of our `--extern` arguments have the `force` option and weren't already used, we inject an `extern crate` statement for them. The injection logic was added in `rustc_builtin_macros` as that's where similar injections for tests, proc-macros, and std/core already live.~
(New contributor - grateful for feedback and guidance!)
Update the version of musl used on `*-linux-musl` targets to 1.2.3
Update the version of musl used on our Linux musl targets from 1.1.24 to 1.2.3 as proposed in rust-lang/compiler-team#572. musl 1.2.3 is the latest version of musl and supports the same range of Linux kernels as the 1.1 series. As such, it does not affect the minimum supported version of Linux for any of the musl targets.
One of the major musl 1.2 features is support for [time64](https://musl.libc.org/time64.html). This support is both source and ABI compatible with programs built against musl 1.1 and so updating the musl version for these targets should not cause Rust programs to fail to run or compile (a [crater run](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/107129#issuecomment-1407196104) has been completed which demonstrates this for the `i686-unknown-linux-musl` target).
Once this change reaches stable, the `libc` crate will then be able to [update their definitions to support 64-bit time](https://github.com/rust-lang/libc/pull/3068), matching the default musl 1.2 APIs exactly.
Fixes#91178
