Implement intrinsics with fallback bodies #120500
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_gcc Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_cranelift cc @bjorn3 Some changes occurred to the CTFE / Miri engine cc @rust-lang/miri Some changes occurred in src/tools/clippy cc @rust-lang/clippy Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
bjorn3
reviewed
Jan 30, 2024
bjorn3
reviewed
Jan 30, 2024
WaffleLapkin
approved these changes
Jan 30, 2024
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Thanks for working on this, Oli! I'm really excited 🎉 |
oli-obk
force-pushed
the
intrinsics2.0
branch
from
0ed9f48
to
dadf506
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Some changes occurred in src/librustdoc/clean/types.rs cc @camelid |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Should finally be ready. We don't need miri support from the get go, so I'd rather do it in a separate PR. |
bjorn3
reviewed
Feb 1, 2024
| fx.tcx | ||
| .dcx() | ||
| .span_fatal(source_info.span, format!("unsupported intrinsic {}", intrinsic)); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What will the error message be for intrinsics that are neither implemented by cg_clif nor have a fallback body?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
probably gonna ICE 😆
|
cg_clif changes LGTM |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
WaffleLapkin
approved these changes
Feb 2, 2024
|
The Miri subtree was changed cc @rust-lang/miri |
oli-obk
force-pushed
the
intrinsics2.0
branch
from
7ef9869
to
585e76a
Compare
|
@bors r=WaffleLapkin |
|
The default log presentation was not expanding for me; below is what I think was causing the failure according to what I saw from skimming the raw log itself. Snippet of raw log output with ui test failures |
|
That's an error from a different PR: #120847 (see last commit) |
oli-obk
added a commit
to oli-obk/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 15, 2024
Implement intrinsics with fallback bodies fixes rust-lang#93145 (though we can port many more intrinsics) cc rust-lang#63585 The way this works is that the backend logic for generating custom code for intrinsics has been made fallible. The only failure path is "this intrinsic is unknown". The `Instance` (that was `InstanceDef::Intrinsic`) then gets converted to `InstanceDef::Item`, which represents the fallback body. A regular function call to that body is then codegenned. This is currently implemented for * codegen_ssa (so llvm and gcc) * codegen_cranelift other backends will need to adjust, but they can just keep doing what they were doing if they prefer (though adding new intrinsics to the compiler will then require them to implement them, instead of getting the fallback body). cc `@scottmcm` `@WaffleLapkin` ### todo * [ ] miri support * [x] default intrinsic name to name of function instead of requiring it to be specified in attribute * [x] make sure that the bodies are always available (must be collected for metadata)
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
This was referenced Feb 16, 2024
Merged
Closed
|
Finished benchmarking commit (dfa88b3): comparison URL. Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Max RSS (memory usage)ResultsThis 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.
CyclesThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 637.782s -> 637.11s (-0.11%) |
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 22, 2024
Add a scheme for moving away from `extern "rust-intrinsic"` entirely All `rust-intrinsic`s can become free functions now, either with a fallback body, or with a dummy body and an attribute, requiring backends to actually implement the intrinsic. This PR demonstrates the dummy-body scheme with the `vtable_size` intrinsic. cc rust-lang#63585 follow-up to rust-lang#120500 MCP at rust-lang/compiler-team#720
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 22, 2024
Add a scheme for moving away from `extern "rust-intrinsic"` entirely All `rust-intrinsic`s can become free functions now, either with a fallback body, or with a dummy body and an attribute, requiring backends to actually implement the intrinsic. This PR demonstrates the dummy-body scheme with the `vtable_size` intrinsic. cc rust-lang#63585 follow-up to rust-lang#120500 MCP at rust-lang/compiler-team#720
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 23, 2024
Add a scheme for moving away from `extern "rust-intrinsic"` entirely All `rust-intrinsic`s can become free functions now, either with a fallback body, or with a dummy body and an attribute, requiring backends to actually implement the intrinsic. This PR demonstrates the dummy-body scheme with the `vtable_size` intrinsic. cc rust-lang#63585 follow-up to rust-lang#120500 MCP at rust-lang/compiler-team#720
celinval
added a commit
to model-checking/kani
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 26, 2024
Upgrade toolchain to 2024-02-17. Relevant PR: - rust-lang/rust#120500 - rust-lang/rust#100603 Fixes #87 Fixes #3034 Fixes #3037
flip1995
pushed a commit
to flip1995/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 26, 2024
Implement intrinsics with fallback bodies fixes rust-lang#93145 (though we can port many more intrinsics) cc rust-lang#63585 The way this works is that the backend logic for generating custom code for intrinsics has been made fallible. The only failure path is "this intrinsic is unknown". The `Instance` (that was `InstanceDef::Intrinsic`) then gets converted to `InstanceDef::Item`, which represents the fallback body. A regular function call to that body is then codegenned. This is currently implemented for * codegen_ssa (so llvm and gcc) * codegen_cranelift other backends will need to adjust, but they can just keep doing what they were doing if they prefer (though adding new intrinsics to the compiler will then require them to implement them, instead of getting the fallback body). cc `@scottmcm` `@WaffleLapkin` ### todo * [ ] miri support * [x] default intrinsic name to name of function instead of requiring it to be specified in attribute * [x] make sure that the bodies are always available (must be collected for metadata)
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 4, 2024
Add a scheme for moving away from `extern "rust-intrinsic"` entirely All `rust-intrinsic`s can become free functions now, either with a fallback body, or with a dummy body and an attribute, requiring backends to actually implement the intrinsic. This PR demonstrates the dummy-body scheme with the `vtable_size` intrinsic. cc rust-lang#63585 follow-up to rust-lang#120500 MCP at rust-lang/compiler-team#720
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 5, 2024
Add a scheme for moving away from `extern "rust-intrinsic"` entirely All `rust-intrinsic`s can become free functions now, either with a fallback body, or with a dummy body and an attribute, requiring backends to actually implement the intrinsic. This PR demonstrates the dummy-body scheme with the `vtable_size` intrinsic. cc rust-lang#63585 follow-up to rust-lang#120500 MCP at rust-lang/compiler-team#720
flip1995
pushed a commit
to flip1995/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 7, 2024
Add a scheme for moving away from `extern "rust-intrinsic"` entirely All `rust-intrinsic`s can become free functions now, either with a fallback body, or with a dummy body and an attribute, requiring backends to actually implement the intrinsic. This PR demonstrates the dummy-body scheme with the `vtable_size` intrinsic. cc rust-lang#63585 follow-up to rust-lang#120500 MCP at rust-lang/compiler-team#720
Sorry, I just now realized that |
|
Note that is_val_statically_known and const_eval_select are entirely unrelated. (The first is about const propagation, the second about Const eval / CTFE. These two concepts have very little to do with each other.)
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
fixes #93145 (though we can port many more intrinsics)
cc #63585
The way this works is that the backend logic for generating custom code for intrinsics has been made fallible. The only failure path is "this intrinsic is unknown". The
Instance(that wasInstanceDef::Intrinsic) then gets converted toInstanceDef::Item, which represents the fallback body. A regular function call to that body is then codegenned. This is currently implemented forother backends will need to adjust, but they can just keep doing what they were doing if they prefer (though adding new intrinsics to the compiler will then require them to implement them, instead of getting the fallback body).
cc @scottmcm @WaffleLapkin
todo