-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.9k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Prepare for LLVM 10 upgrade #67900
Prepare for LLVM 10 upgrade #67900
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This PR removes debug info tests for LLVM 5/6, but this PR does not explicitly appear to remove any code that would otherwise break those tests (even though LLVM 6 is no longer supported AFAIK)?
Either way r=me once we flesh out the data layout string story.
src/librustc_codegen_llvm/context.rs
Outdated
@@ -156,6 +172,13 @@ pub unsafe fn create_module( | |||
if llvm_util::get_major_version() < 9 { | |||
target_data_layout = strip_function_ptr_alignment(target_data_layout); | |||
} | |||
if sess.target.target.arch == "x86" || sess.target.target.arch == "x86_64" { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should do either one or the other, not both, if either one at all. i.e. we ought to pick whether our target data layouts strings are llvm10 (which IMO they should be) or something else. Then we don’t need code that can both "upgrade" and "downgrade" the string.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There's three parts here:
- Data layout in our own target definitions: I agree that we should update those to use the LLVM 10 data layouts.
- Downgrade support: If we use LLVM 10 data layout, then we must have downgrade support, otherwise older LLVM versions cannot be used anymore.
- Upgrade support: Upgrade support is needed if we want to keep 3rd party target definitions (for x86 based targets) working. If we're okay with breaking these and have no stability guarantees in this area, then we can drop the upgrade support.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don’t believe we have any stability guarantees for external target files. Going in that direction would necessitate removing at least some fields from target specs and data layout would be one of those fields -- we dont want to be on the hook for ensuring stability of LLVM's interfaces.
With that in mind I'd be happy with this if we only kept the downgrade code.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've dropped the upgrade code and updated all the in-tree targets ... hopefully without typos ;)
Right, these tests should have been dropped when LLVM 6 support was dropped (I can't find the relevant PR, because searching for LLVM in PRs is impossible...) The tests fail under LLVM 10 because LLVM 10 is not included in the ignore line, but it seemed to make little sense to extend the ignore if there aren't any non-ignored versions left anymore... |
The integer versions are deprecated
This is similar to the autoupdate LLVM performs internally.
These are no longer relevant, as our minimum supported version is LLVM 7.
InstrProfData.inc has been moved to include/
Only keep the downgrade code
@bors r+ rollup=never |
📌 Commit c9e996f has been approved by |
Prepare for LLVM 10 upgrade Split off from #67759, this just adds the necessary compatibility bits and updates codegen tests, without performing the actual LLVM upgrade. r? @alexcrichton
☀️ Test successful - checks-azure |
Update to LLVM 10 LLVM 10 is going to be branched soon, so it's a good time to start finding all those tasty new miscompiles and performance regressions ;) Status: * Preparation split off into #67900. * Optimization regressions: * [x] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44419 => https://reviews.llvm.org/D72048 has landed. * [x] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44423 => https://reviews.llvm.org/D72060 has landed. * [ ] https://reviews.llvm.org/D72169 submitted. * [ ] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44461 reported. https://reviews.llvm.org/D72420 submitted, but unlikely eligible for LLVM 10. * Compile-time regressions: * [x] GlobalOpt regression identified. ~~fhahn proposed https://reviews.llvm.org/D72214.~~ fhahn has [reverted](llvm/llvm-project@192cce1) the patch. * [ ] Even with the revert, there are [large regressions](https://perf.rust-lang.org/compare.html?start=760ce94c69ca510d44087291c311296f6d9ccdf5&end=4e84f97d76e694bb9f59039f5bdeb6d8bca46d14). * Assertion failures: * [x] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44600 => https://reviews.llvm.org/D73135, https://reviews.llvm.org/D73854 and https://reviews.llvm.org/D73908 have landed and been cherry-picked to the 10.x branch. r? @ghost
Update to LLVM 10 LLVM 10 is going to be branched soon, so it's a good time to start finding all those tasty new miscompiles and performance regressions ;) Status: * Preparation split off into #67900. * Optimization regressions: * [x] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44419 => https://reviews.llvm.org/D72048 has landed. * [x] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44423 => https://reviews.llvm.org/D72060 has landed. * [ ] https://reviews.llvm.org/D72169 submitted. * [ ] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44461 reported. https://reviews.llvm.org/D72420 submitted, but unlikely eligible for LLVM 10. * Compile-time regressions: * [x] GlobalOpt regression identified. ~~fhahn proposed https://reviews.llvm.org/D72214.~~ fhahn has [reverted](llvm/llvm-project@192cce1) the patch. * [ ] Even with the revert, there are [large regressions](https://perf.rust-lang.org/compare.html?start=760ce94c69ca510d44087291c311296f6d9ccdf5&end=4e84f97d76e694bb9f59039f5bdeb6d8bca46d14). * Assertion failures / infinite loops: * [x] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44600 => https://reviews.llvm.org/D73135, https://reviews.llvm.org/D73854 and https://reviews.llvm.org/D73908 have landed and been cherry-picked to the 10.x branch. * [x] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44835 => https://reviews.llvm.org/D74278 has landed and been cherry-picked. r? @ghost
Update to LLVM 10 LLVM 10 is going to be branched soon, so it's a good time to start finding all those tasty new miscompiles and performance regressions ;) Status: * Preparation split off into #67900. * Optimization regressions: * [x] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44419 => https://reviews.llvm.org/D72048 has landed. * [x] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44423 => https://reviews.llvm.org/D72060 has landed. * [ ] https://reviews.llvm.org/D72169 submitted. * [ ] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44461 reported. https://reviews.llvm.org/D72420 submitted, but unlikely eligible for LLVM 10. * Compile-time regressions: * [x] GlobalOpt regression identified. ~~fhahn proposed https://reviews.llvm.org/D72214.~~ fhahn has [reverted](llvm/llvm-project@192cce1) the patch. * [ ] Even with the revert, there are [large regressions](https://perf.rust-lang.org/compare.html?start=760ce94c69ca510d44087291c311296f6d9ccdf5&end=4e84f97d76e694bb9f59039f5bdeb6d8bca46d14). * Assertion failures / infinite loops: * [x] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44600 => https://reviews.llvm.org/D73135, https://reviews.llvm.org/D73854 and https://reviews.llvm.org/D73908 have landed and been cherry-picked to the 10.x branch. * [x] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44835 => https://reviews.llvm.org/D74278 has landed and been cherry-picked. r? @ghost
Update to LLVM 10 LLVM 10 is going to be branched soon, so it's a good time to start finding all those tasty new miscompiles and performance regressions ;) Status: * Preparation split off into rust-lang#67900. * Optimization regressions: * [x] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44419 => https://reviews.llvm.org/D72048 has landed. * [x] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44423 => https://reviews.llvm.org/D72060 has landed. * [x] https://reviews.llvm.org/D72169 submitted. * [ ] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44461 reported. https://reviews.llvm.org/D72420 submitted, but unlikely eligible for LLVM 10. * Compile-time regressions: * [x] GlobalOpt regression identified. ~~fhahn proposed https://reviews.llvm.org/D72214.~~ fhahn has [reverted](llvm/llvm-project@192cce1) the patch. * [ ] Even with the revert, there are [large regressions](https://perf.rust-lang.org/compare.html?start=760ce94c69ca510d44087291c311296f6d9ccdf5&end=4e84f97d76e694bb9f59039f5bdeb6d8bca46d14). * Assertion failures / infinite loops: * [x] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44600 => https://reviews.llvm.org/D73135, https://reviews.llvm.org/D73854 and https://reviews.llvm.org/D73908 have landed and been cherry-picked to the 10.x branch. * [x] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44835 => https://reviews.llvm.org/D74278 has landed and been cherry-picked.
…es, r=Amanieu Enable ARM TME (Transactional Memory Extensions) Enables ARM TME coming up with LLVM 10. Related ARM TME intrinsics are included by the merge of rust-lang#67900. Enables: rust-lang/stdarch#855
In a recent change, 8b19922, adjustments were made to the data layout we pass to LLVM. Unfortunately, the illumos target was missed in this change. See also: rust-lang#67900
update data layout for illumos x86 In a recent change, 8b19922, adjustments were made to the data layout we pass to LLVM. Unfortunately, the illumos target was missed in this change. See also: rust-lang#67900
Split off from #67759, this just adds the necessary compatibility bits and updates codegen tests, without performing the actual LLVM upgrade.
r? @alexcrichton