Skip to content

Rollup of 15 pull requests #142396

New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Closed
wants to merge 36 commits into from

Conversation

workingjubilee
Copy link
Member

@workingjubilee workingjubilee commented Jun 12, 2025

Successful merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

nwoods-cimpress and others added 30 commits March 10, 2025 11:12
Add that the enum must be `#[repr(Rust)]` and not `#[repr(packed)]` or `#[repr(align)]` in order to be ABI-compatible with its null-pointer-optimized field.
Explicitly cross-build it for GPU targets and check it errors on hosts.
Some architectures gain target-cpu minimums in doing so.
- Rewords existing Considerations section on `fetch_update` and friends
to make clear that the limitations are inherent to an implementation based on any
CAS operation, rather than the weak version of `compare_exchange` in particular
- Add Considerations to `compare_exchange` and `compare_exchange_weak`
which details similar considerations and when they may be relevant.
This was attempted in [1] then reverted in [2] because of fallout.
Recently, this was made an edition-dependent error in [3].

Make missing fragment specifiers an unconditional error again.

[1]: rust-lang#75516
[2]: rust-lang#80210
[3]: rust-lang#128006
This removes the `compiler_builtins` dependency from a handful of
library dependencies, which is progress toward [1].

[1]: rust-lang#142265
…r-unconditional, r=petrochenkov,traviscross

Make `missing_fragment_specifier` an unconditional error

This was attempted in [1] then reverted in [2] because of fallout. Recently, this was made an edition-dependent error in [3].

Make missing fragment specifiers an unconditional error again, across all editions.

More context: rust-lang#128006
Most recent crater: rust-lang#128425 (comment)
Fixes: rust-lang#40107

[1]: rust-lang#75516
[2]: rust-lang#80210
[3]: rust-lang#128006
…rors,traviscross

Lint on fn pointers comparisons in external macros

This PR extends the recently stabilized `unpredictable_function_pointer_comparisons` lint ~~to also lint on `Option<{function pointer}>` and~~ as well as linting in external macros (as to catch `assert_eq!` and others).

```rust
assert_eq!(Some::<FnPtr>(func), Some(func as unsafe extern "C" fn()));
//~^ WARN function pointer comparisons

#[derive(PartialEq, Eq)]
struct A {
    f: fn(),
    //~^ WARN function pointer comparisons
}
```

Fixes rust-lang#134527
…e, r=dtolnay

Added `Clone` implementation for `ChunkBy`

Added `Clone` implementation for `ChunkBy`

Closes rust-lang#137969.
add `extern "custom"` functions

tracking issue: rust-lang#140829
previous discussion: rust-lang#140566

In short, an `extern "custom"` function is a function with a custom ABI, that rust does not know about. Therefore, such functions can only be defined with `#[unsafe(naked)]` and `naked_asm!`, or via an `extern "C" { /* ... */ }` block. These functions cannot be called using normal rust syntax: calling them can only be done from inline assembly.

The motivation is low-level scenarios where a custom calling convention is used. Currently, we often pick `extern "C"`, but that is a lie because the function does not actually respect the C calling convention.

At the moment `"custom"` seems to be the name with the most support. That name is not final, but we need to pick something to actually implement this.

r? `@traviscross`
cc `@tgross35`
…r-errors

resolve: Tweak `private_macro_use` lint to be compatible with upcoming macro prelude changes

Unblocks rust-lang#139493.
Zulip thread requesting help - [#t-compiler/help > Help requested for effects of rust-lang#139493](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/182449-t-compiler.2Fhelp/topic/Help.20requested.20for.20effects.20of.20.23139493/with/514653911).

This PR by itself shouldn't cause any observable changes, its only observable effect is that the prelude changes from rust-lang#139493 will no longer cause regressions in tests like `tests/ui/imports/issue-119369.rs` or `tests/ui/extern/issue-80074.rs`.

This is achieved by moving the "is this thing in stdlib prelude" check from an early point (`fn process_macro_use_imports`) to a later point (`fn record_use_inner`), at which the stdlib prelude is already populated and can be inspected.
(The `is_builtin_macro` check is subsumed by the stdlib prelude check, all built-in macros go through the stdlib prelude anyway.)
…traviscross

Specify that "option-like" enums must be `#[repr(Rust)]` to be ABI-compatible with their non-1ZST field.

Add that the enum must be `#[repr(Rust)]` and not `#[repr(packed)]` or `#[repr(align)]` in order to be ABI-compatible with its null-pointer-optimized field.

The specific rules here were decided on here: rust-lang#130628 (comment) but `repr` was not mentioned. In practice, only `#[repr(Rust)]` (or no `repr` attribute, which is equivalent) works for this, so add that to the docs.

-----

Restrict to `#[repr(Rust)]` only, since:
* `#[repr(C)]` and the primitive representations (`#[repr(u8)]` etc) definitely disqualify the enum from NPO, since they have defined layouts that store the tag separately to the payload.
* `#[repr(transparent)]` enums are covered two bullet points above this (line 1830), and cannot have multiple variants, so would fail the "The enum has exactly two variants" requirement anyway.

As for `#[repr(align)]`: my current wording that it is completely disallowed may be too strong: it seems like `#[repr(align(<= alignment of T))] enum Foo { X, Y(T) }` currently does still have the same ABI as `T` in practice, though this may not be something we want to promise. (`#[repr(align(> alignment of T))]` definitely disqualifies the enum from being ABI-compatible with T currently).

I added the note about `packed` to match `align`, but `#[repr(packed)]` currently can't be applied to `enum`s at all anyway, so might be unnecessary.

-----

I think this needs T-lang approval?

cc `@workingjubilee`
…piler-errors

docs: autogenerate compiler flag stubs based on -Zhelp

Adds autogenerated compiler flag stubs to the unstable book by building rustc, passing it's path to `unstable-book-gen`, and using that to call the compiler with `-Zhelp` and create a similar `Features` that is used for library and lang stubs.

Example:

```md
# `combine_cgu`

combine CGUs into a single one

This feature has no tracking issue, and is therefore likely internal to the compiler, not being intended for general use.

------------------------
```

Closes rust-lang#141525
…-per-arch, r=nikic

tests: Split dont-shuffle-bswaps along opt-levels and arches

This duplicates dont-shuffle-bswaps in order to make each opt level its own test. Then -opt3.rs gets split into a revision per arch we want to test, with certain architectures gaining new target-cpu minimums.
Add supported asm types for LoongArch32

r? ````@Amanieu````
Improve clarity of `core::sync::atomic` docs about "Considerations" in regards to CAS operations

## Motivation

The existing documentation for atomic `fetch_update` (and other similar methods) has a section that reads like so:

> ### Considerations
> This method is not magic; it is not provided by the hardware. It is implemented in
> terms of `AtomicBlah::compare_exchange_weak`, and suffers from the same drawbacks.
> In particular, this method will not circumvent the [ABA Problem].
>
> [ABA Problem]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABA_problem

The wording here seems to imply that the drawbacks being discusses are caused by the *`weak` version* of `compare_exchange`, and that one may avoid those drawbacks by using `compare_exchange` instead. Indeed, a conversation in the `#dark-arts` channel on the Rust community discord based on this interpretation led to this PR.

In reality, the drawbacks are inherent to implementing such an operation based on *any* compare-and-swap style operation, as opposed to an [LL,SC](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load-link/store-conditional) operation, and they apply equally to `compare_exchange` and `compare_exchange_weak` as well.

## Changes

- Rewords existing Considerations section on `fetch_update` and friends to make clear that the limitations are inherent to an implementation based on any CAS operation, rather than the weak version of `compare_exchange` in particular. New version:

> ### Considerations
>
> This method is not magic; it is not provided by the hardware, and does not act like a
> critical section or mutex.
>
> It is implemented on top of an atomic [compare-and-swap operation], and thus is subject to
> the usual drawbacks of CAS operations. In particular, be careful of the [ABA problem]
> if this atomic integer is an index or more generally if knowledge of only the *bitwise value*
> of the atomic is not in and of itself sufficient to ensure any required preconditions.
>
> [ABA Problem]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABA_problem
> [compare-and-swap operation]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compare-and-swap

- Add Considerations to `compare_exchange` and `compare_exchange_weak` which details similar considerations and when they may be relevant. New version:

> ### Considerations
>
> `compare_exchange` is a [compare-and-swap operation] and thus exhibits the usual downsides
> of CAS operations. In particular, a load of the value followed by a successful
> `compare_exchange` with the previous load *does not ensure* that other threads have not
> changed the value in the interim. This is usually important when the *equality* check in
> the `compare_exchange` is being used to check the *identity* of a value, but equality
> does not necessarily imply identity. In this case, `compare_exchange` can lead to the
> [ABA problem].
>
> [ABA Problem]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABA_problem
> [compare-and-swap operation]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compare-and-swap
…n-ast-lowering, r=oli-obk

assert more in release in `rustc_ast_lowering`

My understanding of the compiler's architecture is that in the `ast_lowering` crate, we are constructing the HIR as a one-time thing per crate. This is after tokenizing, parsing, resolution, expansion, possible reparsing, reresolution, reexpansion, and so on. In other words, there are many reasons that perf-focused PRs spend a lot of time touching `rustc_parse`, `rustc_expand`, `rustc_ast`, and then `rustc_hir` and "onwards", but `ast_lowering` is a little bit of an odd duck.

In this crate, we have a number of debug assertions. Some are clearly expensive checks that seem like they are prohibitive to run in actual optimized compiler builds, but then there are a number that are simple asserts on integer equalities, `is_empty`, or the like. I believe we should do some of them even in release builds, because the correctness gain is worth the performance cost: almost zero.
…eature-gate-test, r=jieyouxu

tests: Minicore `extern "gpu-kernel"` feature test

Explicitly cross-build it for GPU targets and check it errors on hosts. A relatively minor cleanup from my other ABI-related PRs that I got tired of rebasing.
…r=Mark-Simulacrum

Update dependencies in `library/Cargo.lock`

This removes the `compiler_builtins` dependency from a handful of library dependencies, which is progress toward [1].

[1]: rust-lang#142265
miri: add flag to suppress float non-determinism

We have flags controlling most non-determinism, so this seems generally useful for debugging. It is also needed to work around rust-lang/portable-simd#463 in miri-test-libstd.

I made this a rustc PR so that it propagates faster to unbreak miri-test-libstd.
r? `@oli-obk`
…cl-and-other-abis, r=RalfJung

compiler: Ease off the accelerator on `unsupported_calling_conventions`

This is to give us more time to discuss rust-lang#142330 without the ecosystem having an anxiety attack. I have withdrawn `unsupported_calling_conventions` from report-in-deps

I believe we should consider this a simple suspension of the decision in rust-lang#141435 to start this process, rather than a reversal. That is, we may continue with linting again. But I believe we are about to get a... reasonable amount of feedback just from currently available information and should allow ourselves time to process it.
@rustbot rustbot added A-LLVM Area: Code generation parts specific to LLVM. Both correctness bugs and optimization-related issues. S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc-frontend Relevant to the rustdoc-frontend team, which will review and decide on the web UI/UX output. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels Jun 12, 2025
@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=5

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 12, 2025

📌 Commit 0099a1f has been approved by workingjubilee

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jun 12, 2025
@rust-log-analyzer
Copy link
Collaborator

The job x86_64-gnu-tools failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
    |
107 | #[cfg_attr(not(bootstrap), allow(unpredictable_function_pointer_comparisons))]
    |                ^^^^^^^^^
    |
    = help: expected names are: `docsrs`, `feature`, `no_fp_fmt_parse`, `target_has_reliable_f128`, `target_has_reliable_f128_math`, `target_has_reliable_f16`, `target_has_reliable_f16_math`, and `test` and 31 more
    = help: consider using a Cargo feature instead
    = help: or consider adding in `Cargo.toml` the `check-cfg` lint config for the lint:
             [lints.rust]
             unexpected_cfgs = { level = "warn", check-cfg = ['cfg(bootstrap)'] }
    = help: or consider adding `println!("cargo::rustc-check-cfg=cfg(bootstrap)");` to the top of the `build.rs`

@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r-

@workingjubilee workingjubilee deleted the rollup-12rpb5h branch June 12, 2025 05:30
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
A-LLVM Area: Code generation parts specific to LLVM. Both correctness bugs and optimization-related issues. rollup A PR which is a rollup S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc-frontend Relevant to the rustdoc-frontend team, which will review and decide on the web UI/UX output.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.