llvm will look at both
1. the values of "target-features" and
2. the function string attributes.
this removes the redundant function string attribute because it is not needed at all.
rustc sets the `+backchain` attribute through `target_features_attr(...)`
abi: add a rust-preserve-none calling convention
This is the conceptual opposite of the rust-cold calling convention and is particularly useful in combination with the new `explicit_tail_calls` feature.
For relatively tight loops implemented with tail calling (`become`) each of the function with the regular calling convention is still responsible for restoring the initial value of the preserved registers. So it is not unusual to end up with a situation where each step in the tail call loop is spilling and reloading registers, along the lines of:
foo:
push r12
; do things
pop r12
jmp next_step
This adds up quickly, especially when most of the clobberable registers are already used to pass arguments or other uses.
I was thinking of making the name of this ABI a little less LLVM-derived and more like a conceptual inverse of `rust-cold`, but could not come with a great name (`rust-cold` is itself not a great name: cold in what context? from which perspective? is it supposed to mean that the function is rarely called?)
This is the conceptual opposite of the rust-cold calling convention and
is particularly useful in combination with the new `explicit_tail_calls`
feature.
For relatively tight loops implemented with tail calling (`become`) each
of the function with the regular calling convention is still responsible
for restoring the initial value of the preserved registers. So it is not
unusual to end up with a situation where each step in the tail call loop
is spilling and reloading registers, along the lines of:
foo:
push r12
; do things
pop r12
jmp next_step
This adds up quickly, especially when most of the clobberable registers
are already used to pass arguments or other uses.
I was thinking of making the name of this ABI a little less LLVM-derived
and more like a conceptual inverse of `rust-cold`, but could not come
with a great name (`rust-cold` is itself not a great name: cold in what
context? from which perspective? is it supposed to mean that the
function is rarely called?)
This reverts PR <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/130998> because
the added test seems to be flaky / non-deterministic, and has been
failing in unrelated PRs during merge CI.
Add default sanitizers to TargetOptions
Some sanitizers are part of a system's ABI, like the shadow call stack on Aarch64 and RISC-V Fuchsia. Typically ABI options have other spellings, but LLVM has, for historical reasons, marked this as a sanitizer instead of an alternate ABI option. As a result, Fuchsia targets may not be compiled against the correct ABI unless this option is set. This hasn't caused correctness problems, since the backend reserves the SCS register, and thus preserves its value. But this is an issue for unwinding, as the SCS will not be an array of PCs describing the call complete call chain, and will have gaps from callers that don't use the correct ABI.
In the long term, I'd like to see all the sanitizer configs that all frontends copy from clang moved into llvm's libFrontend, and exposed so that frontend consumers can use a small set of simple APIs to use sanitizers in a consistent way across the LLVM ecosystem, but that work is not yet ready today.
Some sanitizers are part of a system's ABI, like the shadow call stack
on Aarch64 and RISC-V Fuchsia. Typically ABI options have other
spellings, but LLVM has, for historical reasons, marked this as a
sanitizer instead of an alternate ABI option. As a result, Fuchsia
targets may not be compiled against the correct ABI unless this option
is set. This hasn't caused correctness problems, since the backend
reserves the SCS register, and thus preserves its value. But this is an
issue for unwinding, as the SCS will not be an array of PCs describing
the call complete call chain, and will have gaps from callers that don't
use the correct ABI.
In the long term, I'd like to see all the sanitizer configs that all
frontends copy from clang moved into llvm's libFrontend, and exposed so
that frontend consumers can use a small set of simple APIs to use
sanitizers in a consistent way across the LLVM ecosystem, but that work
is not yet ready today.
Use llfn_attrs_from_instance() to generate the attributes for the
allocator shim. This ensures that we generate all the usual
attributes (and don't get to find out one-by-one that a certain
attribute is important for a certain target). Additionally this
will enable emitting the allocator-specific attributes (not
included here).
This change is quite awkward because the allocator shim uses
SimpleCx, while llfn_attrs_from_instance uses CodegenCx. I've
switched it to use SimpleCx plus tcx/sess arguments where necessary.
If there's a simpler way to do this, I'd love to know about it...
Couple of codegen_fn_attrs improvements
As noted in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/144678#discussion_r2245060329 here is no need to keep link_name and export_name separate, which the third commit fixes by merging them. The second commit removes some dead code and the first commit merges two ifs with equivalent conditions. The last commit is an unrelated change which removes an unused `feature(autodiff)`.
There is one comment at a call site and one comment in the function
definition that are mostly saying the same thing. Fold the call site
comment into the function definition comment to reduce duplication.
There are actually some inaccuracies in the comments but let's
deduplicate before we address the inaccuracies.
add `-Zmin-function-alignment`
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/82232
This PR adds the `-Zmin-function-alignment=<align>` flag, that specifies a minimum alignment for all* functions.
### Motivation
This feature is requested by RfL [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/128830):
> i.e. the equivalents of `-fmin-function-alignment` ([GCC](https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html#index-fmin-function-alignment_003dn), Clang does not support it) / `-falign-functions` ([GCC](https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html#index-falign-functions), [Clang](https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ClangCommandLineReference.html#cmdoption-clang1-falign-functions)).
>
> For the Linux kernel, the behavior wanted is that of GCC's `-fmin-function-alignment` and Clang's `-falign-functions`, i.e. align all functions, including cold functions.
>
> There is [`feature(fn_align)`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/82232), but we need to do it globally.
### Behavior
The `fn_align` feature does not have an RFC. It was decided at the time that it would not be necessary, but maybe we feel differently about that now? In any case, here are the semantics of this flag:
- `-Zmin-function-alignment=<align>` specifies the minimum alignment of all* functions
- the `#[repr(align(<align>))]` attribute can be used to override the function alignment on a per-function basis: when `-Zmin-function-alignment` is specified, the attribute's value is only used when it is higher than the value passed to `-Zmin-function-alignment`.
- the target may decide to use a higher value (e.g. on x86_64 the minimum that LLVM generates is 16)
- The highest supported alignment in rust is `2^29`: I checked a bunch of targets, and they all emit the `.p2align 29` directive for targets that align functions at all (some GPU stuff does not have function alignment).
*: Only with `build-std` would the minimum alignment also be applied to `std` functions.
---
cc `@ojeda`
r? `@workingjubilee` you were active on the tracking issue
Adds `#[rustc_force_inline]` which is similar to always inlining but
reports an error if the inlining was not possible, and which always
attempts to inline annotated items, regardless of optimisation levels.
It can only be applied to free functions to guarantee that the MIR
inliner will be able to resolve calls.
rustc_codegen_llvm: Add a new 'pc' option to branch-protection
Add a new 'pc' option to -Z branch-protection for aarch64 that enables the use of PC as a diversifier in PAC branch protection code.
When the pauth-lr target feature is enabled in combination with -Z branch-protection=pac-ret,pc, the new 9.5-a instructions (pacibsppc, retaasppc, etc) will be generated.
Add a new 'pc' option to -Z branch-protection for aarch64 that
enables the use of PC as a diversifier in PAC branch protection code.
When the pauth-lr target feature is enabled in combination
with -Z branch-protection=pac-ret,pc, the new 9.5-a instructions
(pacibsppc, retaasppc, etc) will be generated.
`rustc_codegen_llvm` and `rustc_codegen_gcc` duplicated logic for
checking if tied target features were partially enabled. This commit
consolidates these checks into `rustc_codegen_ssa` in the
`codegen_fn_attrs` query, which also is run pre-monomorphisation for
each function, which ensures that this check is run for unused functions,
as would be expected.
Eddy (Eduard) Stefes