Rollup of 2 pull requests #142996
Closed
Rollup of 2 pull requests #142996
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
…secure-abis-always-match-c, r=compiler-errors Withdraw the claim `extern "C-cmse-nonsecure-*"` always matches `extern "C"` We currently claim that `extern "C-cmse-nonsecure-*"` ABIs will always match `extern "C"`, but that seems... **optimistic** when one considers that `extern "C"` is ambiguous enough to be redefined in ways we may not want the Cortex M Security Extensions ABIs to mirror. If some configuration, feature, or other platform quirk that applied to Arm CPUs with CMSE would modify the `extern "C"` ABI, it does not seem like we should guarantee that also applies to the `extern "cmse-nonsecure-*"` ABIs. Anything involving target modifiers that might affect register availability or usage could make us liars if, for instance, clang decides those apply to normal C functions but not ones with the CMSE attributes, but we still want to have interop with the C compiler. We simply do not control enough of the factors involved to both force these ABIs to match and still provide useful interop, so we shouldn't implicitly promise they do. We should leave this judgement call to the decisions of platform experts who can afford to keep up with the latest news from Cambridge, instead of enshrining today's hopeful guess forever in Rust's permitted ABIs. It's a bit weird anyways. - The attributes are `__attribute__((cmse_nonsecure_call))` and `__attribute__((cmse_nonsecure_entry))`, so the obvious choice is `extern "cmse-nonsecure-call"` and `extern "cmse-nonsecure-entry"`. - We do not prefix any other ABI that reflects (or even *is*) a C ABI with "C-", with the exception of the Rust-defined `extern "C-unwind`", e.g. we do not have `extern "C-aapcs"` or `extern "C-sysv64"`. Tracking issues: - rust-lang#75835 - rust-lang#81391
…signature, r=workingjubilee Error on invalid signatures for interrupt ABIs We recently added `extern "custom"`, which must have type `fn()`. The various `extern "interrupt"` ABIs impose similar constraints on the signature of functions with that ABI: `x86-interrupt` should not have a return type (linting on the exact argument types is left as future work), and the other interrupt ABIs cannot have any parameters or a return type. r? ``@workingjubilee``
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
hmm, gotta be my own PR. |
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.
Successful merges:
extern "C-cmse-nonsecure-*"always matchesextern "C"#142146 (Withdraw the claimextern "C-cmse-nonsecure-*"always matchesextern "C")Failed merges:
r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup