Use Symbol for inline asm register class names
This takes care of one "FIXME":
// FIXME: use direct symbol comparison for register class names
Instead of using string literals, this uses Symbol for register
class names.
This is part of work I am doing to improve how Symbol interning works.
This takes care of one "FIXME":
// FIXME: use direct symbol comparison for register class names
Instead of using string literals, this uses Symbol for register
class names.
Add wasm32 support to inline asm
There is some contention around inline asm and wasm, and I really only made this to figure out the process of hacking on rustc, but I figured as long as the code existed, it was worth uploading.
cc `@Amanieu`
It is applied exactly when the return value has an indirect pass mode.
Except for InReg on x86 fastcall, arg attrs are now only used for
optimization purposes and thus are fine to ignore.
rustc_target: Mark UEFI targets as `is_like_windows`/`is_like_msvc`
And document what `is_like_windows` and `is_like_msvc` actually mean in more detail.
Addresses FIXMEs left from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/71030.
r? `@nagisa`
Add asm register information for SPIR-V
As discussed in [zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/182449-t-compiler.2Fhelp/topic/Defining.20asm!.20for.20new.20architecture), we at [rust-gpu](https://github.com/EmbarkStudios/rust-gpu) would like to support `asm!` for our SPIR-V backend. However, we cannot do so purely without frontend support: [this match](d4ea0b3e46/compiler/rustc_target/src/asm/mod.rs (L185)) fails and so `asm!` is not supported ([error reported here](d4ea0b3e46/compiler/rustc_ast_lowering/src/expr.rs (L1095))). To resolve this, we need to stub out register information for SPIR-V to support getting the `asm!` content all the way to [`AsmBuilderMethods::codegen_inline_asm`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_codegen_ssa/traits/trait.AsmBuilderMethods.html#tymethod.codegen_inline_asm), at which point the rust-gpu backend can do all the parsing and codegen that is needed.
This is a pretty weird PR - adding support for a backend that isn't in-tree feels pretty gross to me, but I don't see an easy way around this. ``@Amanieu`` said I should submit it anyway, so, here we are! Let me know if this needs to go through a more formal process (MCP?) and what I should do to help this along.
I based this off the [wasm asm PR](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/78684), which unfortunately this PR conflicts with that one quite a bit, sorry for any merge conflict pain :(
---
Some open questions:
- What do we call the register class? Some context, SPIR-V is an SSA-based IR, there are "instructions" that create IDs (referred to as `<id>` in the spec), which can be referenced by other instructions. So, `reg` isn't exactly accurate, they're SSA IDs, not re-assignable registers.
- What happens when a SPIR-V register gets to the LLVM backend? Right now it's a `bug!`, but should that be a `sess.fatal()`? I'm not sure if it's even possible to reach that point, maybe there's a check that prevents the `spirv` target from even reaching that codepath.
Majority of targets use "unknown" vendor and changing it from "unknown" to omitted doesn't make sense.
From the LLVM docs (https://clang.llvm.org/docs/CrossCompilation.html#target-triple):
>Most of the time it can be omitted (and Unknown) will be assumed, which sets the defaults for the specified architecture.
>When a parameter is not important, it can be omitted, or you can choose unknown and the defaults will be used. If you choose a parameter that Clang doesn’t know, like blerg, it’ll ignore and assume unknown
rustc_target: Further cleanup use of target options
Follow up to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/77729.
Implements items 2 and 4 from the list in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/77729#issue-500228243.
The first commit collapses uses of `target.options.foo` into `target.foo`.
The second commit renames some target options to avoid tautology:
`target.target_endian` -> `target.endian`
`target.target_c_int_width` -> `target.c_int_width`
`target.target_os` -> `target.os`
`target.target_env` -> `target.env`
`target.target_vendor` -> `target.vendor`
`target.target_family` -> `target.os_family`
`target.target_mcount` -> `target.mcount`
r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
with an eye on merging `TargetOptions` into `Target`.
`TargetOptions` as a separate structure is mostly an implementation detail of `Target` construction, all its fields logically belong to `Target` and available from `Target` through `Deref` impls.
