Add `riscv64gc-unknown-hermit` target
This PR adds the new `riscv64gc-unknown-hermit` target, initially created by `@simonschoening,` a 64-bit RISC-V target for the [Hermit] unikernel project.
Furthermore, this cleans up the existing Hermit targets and adds a platform support documentation page for _all_ Hermit targets and goes through the new tier 3 target policy process:
[Hermit]: https://github.com/hermitcore
## Tier 3 target policy
> - A tier 3 target must have a designated developer or developers (the "target
> maintainers") on record to be CCed when issues arise regarding the target.
> (The mechanism to track and CC such developers may evolve over time.)
`@stlankes` as the Hermit project lead and I will be the target maintainers.
> - Targets must use naming consistent with any existing targets; for instance, a
> target for the same CPU or OS as an existing Rust target should use the same
> name for that CPU or OS. Targets should normally use the same names and
> naming conventions as used elsewhere in the broader ecosystem beyond Rust
> (such as in other toolchains), unless they have a very good reason to
> diverge. Changing the name of a target can be highly disruptive, especially
> once the target reaches a higher tier, so getting the name right is important
> even for a tier 3 target.
> - Target names should not introduce undue confusion or ambiguity unless
> absolutely necessary to maintain ecosystem compatibility. For example, if
> the name of the target makes people extremely likely to form incorrect
> beliefs about what it targets, the name should be changed or augmented to
> disambiguate it.
> - If possible, use only letters, numbers, dashes and underscores for the name.
> Periods (`.`) are known to cause issues in Cargo.
The target name `riscv64gc-unknown-hermit` was derived from the existing `x86_64-unknown-hermit` and `aarch64-unknown-hermit` targets.
> - Tier 3 targets may have unusual requirements to build or use, but must not
> create legal issues or impose onerous legal terms for the Rust project or for
> Rust developers or users.
> - The target must not introduce license incompatibilities.
> - Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust
> license (`MIT OR Apache-2.0`).
> - The target must not cause the Rust tools or libraries built for any other
> host (even when supporting cross-compilation to the target) to depend
> on any new dependency less permissive than the Rust licensing policy. This
> applies whether the dependency is a Rust crate that would require adding
> new license exceptions (as specified by the `tidy` tool in the
> rust-lang/rust repository), or whether the dependency is a native library
> or binary. In other words, the introduction of the target must not cause a
> user installing or running a version of Rust or the Rust tools to be
> subject to any new license requirements.
> - Compiling, linking, and emitting functional binaries, libraries, or other
> code for the target (whether hosted on the target itself or cross-compiling
> from another target) must not depend on proprietary (non-FOSS) libraries.
> Host tools built for the target itself may depend on the ordinary runtime
> libraries supplied by the platform and commonly used by other applications
> built for the target, but those libraries must not be required for code
> generation for the target; cross-compilation to the target must not require
> such libraries at all. For instance, `rustc` built for the target may
> depend on a common proprietary C runtime library or console output library,
> but must not depend on a proprietary code generation library or code
> optimization library. Rust's license permits such combinations, but the
> Rust project has no interest in maintaining such combinations within the
> scope of Rust itself, even at tier 3.
> - "onerous" here is an intentionally subjective term. At a minimum, "onerous"
> legal/licensing terms include but are *not* limited to: non-disclosure
> requirements, non-compete requirements, contributor license agreements
> (CLAs) or equivalent, "non-commercial"/"research-only"/etc terms,
> requirements conditional on the employer or employment of any particular
> Rust developers, revocable terms, any requirements that create liability
> for the Rust project or its developers or users, or any requirements that
> adversely affect the livelihood or prospects of the Rust project or its
> developers or users.
No dependencies were added to Rust.
> - Neither this policy nor any decisions made regarding targets shall create any
> binding agreement or estoppel by any party. If any member of an approving
> Rust team serves as one of the maintainers of a target, or has any legal or
> employment requirement (explicit or implicit) that might affect their
> decisions regarding a target, they must recuse themselves from any approval
> decisions regarding the target's tier status, though they may otherwise
> participate in discussions.
> - This requirement does not prevent part or all of this policy from being
> cited in an explicit contract or work agreement (e.g. to implement or
> maintain support for a target). This requirement exists to ensure that a
> developer or team responsible for reviewing and approving a target does not
> face any legal threats or obligations that would prevent them from freely
> exercising their judgment in such approval, even if such judgment involves
> subjective matters or goes beyond the letter of these requirements.
Understood.
I am not a member of a Rust team.
> - Tier 3 targets should attempt to implement as much of the standard libraries
> as possible and appropriate (`core` for most targets, `alloc` for targets
> that can support dynamic memory allocation, `std` for targets with an
> operating system or equivalent layer of system-provided functionality), but
> may leave some code unimplemented (either unavailable or stubbed out as
> appropriate), whether because the target makes it impossible to implement or
> challenging to implement. The authors of pull requests are not obligated to
> avoid calling any portions of the standard library on the basis of a tier 3
> target not implementing those portions.
Understood.
`std` is supported.
> - The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how
> to build for the target, using cross-compilation if possible. If the target
> supports running binaries, or running tests (even if they do not pass), the
> documentation must explain how to run such binaries or tests for the target,
> using emulation if possible or dedicated hardware if necessary.
Building is described in the platform support doc.
> - Tier 3 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or
> other developers in the community, to maintain the target. In particular,
> do not post comments (automated or manual) on a PR that derail or suggest a
> block on the PR based on a tier 3 target. Do not send automated messages or
> notifications (via any medium, including via ``@`)` to a PR author or others
> involved with a PR regarding a tier 3 target, unless they have opted into
> such messages.
> - Backlinks such as those generated by the issue/PR tracker when linking to
> an issue or PR are not considered a violation of this policy, within
> reason. However, such messages (even on a separate repository) must not
> generate notifications to anyone involved with a PR who has not requested
> such notifications.
Understood.
> - Patches adding or updating tier 3 targets must not break any existing tier 2
> or tier 1 target, and must not knowingly break another tier 3 target without
> approval of either the compiler team or the maintainers of the other tier 3
> target.
> - In particular, this may come up when working on closely related targets,
> such as variations of the same architecture with different features. Avoid
> introducing unconditional uses of features that another variation of the
> target may not have; use conditional compilation or runtime detection, as
> appropriate, to let each target run code supported by that target.
I don't think this PR breaks anything.
r? compiler-team
This section name is always constant for a given target, but obtaining it from
LLVM requires a few intermediate allocations. There's no need to do so
repeatedly from inside a per-function loop.
Reuse `codegen_ssa` monomorphization errors in `codegen_gcc`
Removes monomorphization errors duplication by reusing the ones defined in `codegen_ssa`.
Also updates `expected_simd` errors usage in `codegen_gcc` by assuming we want to treat those parameters as translatable. See 7a888fb56e
These pre-link args are remains from Hermit's old C version.
We don't need them and we have no reason to override the defaults here.
See ld [1] for details.
[1]: https://sourceware.org/binutils/docs/ld/Options.html
Signed-off-by: Martin Kröning <martin.kroening@eonerc.rwth-aachen.de>
rust-installer: Use env(1) in the shebang.
This fixes the case (e.g. *BSD) where bash is installed on the host system, but not at the typical location of /bin.
Per #112156, using `&` in `format!` may cause a small perf delay, so I tried to clean up one module at a time format usage. This PR includes a few removals of the ref in format (they do compile locally without the ref), as well as a few format inlining for consistency.
Per #112156, using `&` in `format!` may cause a small perf delay, so I tried to clean up one module at a time format usage. This PR includes a few removals of the ref in format (they do compile locally without the ref), as well as a few format inlining for consistency.
GCC uses the `-fshort-enums` ABI for arm-none and the `int`-sized enum
ABI for arm-linux.
Clang uses the `int`-sized enum ABI for all arm targets.
Both options are permitted by AAPCS.
Rust is matching GCC's behavior for these targets, as interop with code
code compiled by GCC is desirable in the bare-metal context. See #87917.
Fix #[inline(always)] on closures with target feature 1.1
Fixes#108655. I think this is the most obvious solution that isn't overly complicated. The comment includes more justification, but I think this is likely better than demoting the `#[inline(always)]` to `#[inline]`, since existing code is unaffected.
Support interpolated block for `try` and `async`
I'm putting this up for T-lang discussion, to decide whether or not they feel like this should be supported. This was raised in #112952, which surprised me. There doesn't seem to be a *technical* reason why we don't support this.
### Precedent:
This is supported:
```rust
macro_rules! always {
($block:block) => {
if true $block
}
}
fn main() {
always!({});
}
```
### Counterpoint:
However, for context, this is *not* supported:
```rust
macro_rules! unsafe_block {
($block:block) => {
unsafe $block
}
}
fn main() {
unsafe_block!({});
}
```
If this support for `async` and `try` with interpolated blocks is *not* desirable, then I can convert them to instead the same diagnostic as `unsafe $block` and make this situation a lot less ambiguous.
----
I'll try to write up more before T-lang triage on Tuesday. I couldn't find anything other than #69760 for why something like `unsafe $block` is not supported, and even that PR doesn't have much information.
Fixes#112952
