Case for Xcoff not handled in prefix_and_suffix
#137219
Labels
A-binary-formats
Area: binary formats (e.g. ELF, XCOFF, etc.)
A-inline-assembly
Area: Inline assembly (`asm!(…)`)
A-naked
Area: `#[naked]`, prologue and epilogue-free, functions, https://git.io/vAzzS
C-bug
Category: This is a bug.
F-naked_functions
`#![feature(naked_functions)]`
O-aix
OS: Big Blue's Advanced Interactive eXecutive..
T-compiler
Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Comments
rustbot
added
the
needs-triage
|
@rustbot label +O-aix |
jieyouxu
added
T-compiler
|
inline/global assembly for these targets does not appear to be well-supported in llvm. Many of the directives that LLVM itself emits are not supported by its assembly parser. I've made this https://godbolt.org/z/xTq8rW876 which shows some of the issues (it needs a bunch of hackery so that we can actually compile for the target). So, I'm not sure that we can make much progress on the rust side without more LLVM support. @rustbot label +F-naked-functions |
|
@rustbot label +F-naked_functions +A-naked +A-inline-assembly |
rustbot
added
A-inline-assembly
matthiaskrgr
added a commit
to matthiaskrgr/rust
that referenced
this issue
Mar 13, 2025
…trieb attempt to support `BinaryFormat::Xcoff` in `naked_asm!` Fixes rust-lang#137219 So, the inline assembly support for xcoff is extremely limited. The LLVM [XCOFFAsmParser](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/1b25c0c4da968fe78921ce77736e5baef4db75e3/llvm/lib/MC/MCParser/XCOFFAsmParser.cpp) does not support many of the attributes that LLVM itself emits, and that should exist based on [the assembler docs](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/ssw_aix_71/assembler/assembler_pdf.pdf). It also does accept some that should not exist based on those docs. So, I've tried to do the best I can given those limitations. At least it's better than emitting the directives for elf and having that fail somewhere deep in LLVM. Given that inline assembly for this target is incomplete (under `asm_experimental_arch`), I think that's OK (and again I don't see how we can do better given the limitations in LLVM). r? `@Noratrieb` (given that you reviewed rust-lang#136637) It seems reasonable to ping the [`powerpc64-ibm-aix` target maintainers](https://doc.rust-lang.org/rustc/platform-support/aix.html), hopefully they have thoughts too: `@daltenty` `@gilamn5tr`
matthiaskrgr
added a commit
to matthiaskrgr/rust
that referenced
this issue
Mar 13, 2025
…trieb attempt to support `BinaryFormat::Xcoff` in `naked_asm!` Fixes rust-lang#137219 So, the inline assembly support for xcoff is extremely limited. The LLVM [XCOFFAsmParser](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/1b25c0c4da968fe78921ce77736e5baef4db75e3/llvm/lib/MC/MCParser/XCOFFAsmParser.cpp) does not support many of the attributes that LLVM itself emits, and that should exist based on [the assembler docs](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/ssw_aix_71/assembler/assembler_pdf.pdf). It also does accept some that should not exist based on those docs. So, I've tried to do the best I can given those limitations. At least it's better than emitting the directives for elf and having that fail somewhere deep in LLVM. Given that inline assembly for this target is incomplete (under `asm_experimental_arch`), I think that's OK (and again I don't see how we can do better given the limitations in LLVM). r? ``@Noratrieb`` (given that you reviewed rust-lang#136637) It seems reasonable to ping the [`powerpc64-ibm-aix` target maintainers](https://doc.rust-lang.org/rustc/platform-support/aix.html), hopefully they have thoughts too: ``@daltenty`` ``@gilamn5tr``
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
Mar 13, 2025
Rollup merge of rust-lang#137816 - folkertdev:naked-asm-xcoff, r=Noratrieb attempt to support `BinaryFormat::Xcoff` in `naked_asm!` Fixes rust-lang#137219 So, the inline assembly support for xcoff is extremely limited. The LLVM [XCOFFAsmParser](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/1b25c0c4da968fe78921ce77736e5baef4db75e3/llvm/lib/MC/MCParser/XCOFFAsmParser.cpp) does not support many of the attributes that LLVM itself emits, and that should exist based on [the assembler docs](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/ssw_aix_71/assembler/assembler_pdf.pdf). It also does accept some that should not exist based on those docs. So, I've tried to do the best I can given those limitations. At least it's better than emitting the directives for elf and having that fail somewhere deep in LLVM. Given that inline assembly for this target is incomplete (under `asm_experimental_arch`), I think that's OK (and again I don't see how we can do better given the limitations in LLVM). r? ```@Noratrieb``` (given that you reviewed rust-lang#136637) It seems reasonable to ping the [`powerpc64-ibm-aix` target maintainers](https://doc.rust-lang.org/rustc/platform-support/aix.html), hopefully they have thoughts too: ```@daltenty``` ```@gilamn5tr```
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Originally posted by @Pyr0de in #136637 (comment)
There is no case handling xcoff here and so it defaults to elf
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: