Fix ABI flags in RISC-V/LoongArch ELF file generated by rustc #114332
Conversation
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
| @@ -79,6 +79,14 @@ LL | let (A(A(..) | B(a), _) | B(A(a, _) | B(a))) = Y; | |||
| | | | |||
| | pattern doesn't bind `a` | |||
|
|
|||
| error[E0408]: variable `c` is not bound in all patterns | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
what happened here... I assume this is related to adding c as a known symbol???
Yeah, I renamed c to builtin_syntax and the error changed in nightly. Looks like it's sorting the symbols by their index? That's strange and bad, but luckily not your problem.
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit 8c53a72df236240bb8926ecf52c39aee4c628640 has been approved by It is now in the queue for this repository. |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
⌛ Testing commit 8c53a72df236240bb8926ecf52c39aee4c628640 with merge ee51c76c691b1bb00208115da9321d0422b8b1ee... |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
Some of the RISC-V targets don't have llvm_abiname set explicitly. I now default unset llvm_abiname to be the same as ilp32/lp64, i.e. not using hardware floating point. |
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #114569) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
|
sorry for the late response, I've been away |
|
@bors r+ |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
|
Finished benchmarking commit (484cb4e): 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.
CyclesResultsThis 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.
Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 635.189s -> 635.452s (0.04%) |
Replace `HashMap` with `IndexMap` in pattern binding resolve fixes rust-lang#114332 (comment)
Replace `HashMap` with `IndexMap` in pattern binding resolve fixes rust-lang#114332 (comment)
Replace `HashMap` with `IndexMap` in pattern binding resolve fixes rust-lang#114332 (comment)
Rollup merge of rust-lang#114454 - Nilstrieb:no-evil-sorting, r=cjgillot Replace `HashMap` with `IndexMap` in pattern binding resolve fixes rust-lang#114332 (comment)
Fix #114153
It turns out the current way to set these flags are completely wrong. In LLVM the target ABI is used instead of target features to determine these flags.
Not sure how to write a test though. Or maybe a test isn't necessary because this affects only those touching target json?
r? @Nilstrieb