Update to LLVM 17.0.6

[nikic]

This is a rebase on the final LLVM 17 release.

Includes the RISCV fix requested in rust-lang/llvm-project#157 (and I think this is also the only change in this release that is relevant to rustc).

r? @cuviper

Fixes #117902

[rustbot]

⚠️ Warning ⚠️

• These commits modify submodules.

[nikic]

Awesome, looks like LLVM updates are broken again.

Failing assertion:

rust/src/bootstrap/src/tests/config.rs

Line 31 in 1a8afa0

assert_eq!(parse_llvm(""), if_unchanged);

[dianqk]

Will backport to beta? llvm/llvm-project#75184 has been merged.

[rustbot]

This PR modifies src/bootstrap/src/core/config.

If appropriate, please update CONFIG_CHANGE_HISTORY in src/bootstrap/src/utils/change_tracker.rs and change-id in config.example.toml.

[nikic]

@dianqk Thanks, I have included the additional cherry-pick.

[wesleywiser]

Nominating for beta-backport as the cherry-pick includes a fix for #117902

[wesleywiser]

@bors p=1

Fixes P-critical and I-unsound issue

[apiraino]

Beta backport approved as per compiler team on Zulip

@rustbot label +beta-accepted

[cuviper]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 601d52a has been approved by cuviper

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 601d52a with merge 604f185...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: cuviper
Pushing 604f185 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (604f185): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.2%	[0.2%, 0.2%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.2%	[0.2%, 0.2%]	1

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.7%	[-0.8%, -0.6%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.7%	[-2.2%, -1.3%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.7%	[-0.8%, -0.6%]	3

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.8%	[0.5%, 1.6%]	4
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.8%	[0.5%, 1.6%]	4

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 671.324s -> 670.068s (-0.19%)
Artifact size: 312.42 MiB -> 312.45 MiB (0.01%)