Tracking Issue for struct_target_features (RFC 3525) #129107
Labels
B-experimental
Blocker: In-tree experiment; RFC pending or unneeded.
C-tracking-issue
Category: A tracking issue for an RFC or an unstable feature.
F-struct_target_features
`#![feature(struct_target_features)]`
T-lang
Relevant to the language team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Comments
veluca93
added
the
C-tracking-issue
BoxyUwU
added
the
T-compiler
traviscross
added
F-struct_target_features
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
Aug 28, 2024
Implement a first version of RFC 3525: struct target features This PR is an attempt at implementing rust-lang/rfcs#3525, behind a feature gate `struct_target_features`. There's obviously a few tasks that ought to be done before this is merged; in no particular order: - add proper error messages - add tests - create a tracking issue for the RFC - properly serialize/deserialize the new target_features field in `rmeta` (assuming I even understood that correctly :-)) That said, as I am definitely not a `rustc` expert, I'd like to get some early feedback on the overall approach before fixing those things (and perhaps some pointers for `rmeta`...), hence this early PR :-) Here's an example piece of code that I have been using for testing - with the new code, the calls to intrinsics get correctly inlined: ```rust #![feature(struct_target_features)] use std::arch::x86_64::*; /* // fails to compile #[target_feature(enable = "avx")] struct Invalid(u32); */ #[target_feature(enable = "avx")] struct Avx {} #[target_feature(enable = "sse")] struct Sse(); /* // fails to compile extern "C" fn bad_fun(_: Avx) {} */ /* // fails to compile #[inline(always)] fn inline_fun(_: Avx) {} */ trait Simd { fn do_something(&self); } impl Simd for Avx { fn do_something(&self) { unsafe { println!("{:?}", _mm256_setzero_ps()); } } } impl Simd for Sse { fn do_something(&self) { unsafe { println!("{:?}", _mm_setzero_ps()); } } } struct WithAvx { #[allow(dead_code)] avx: Avx, } impl Simd for WithAvx { fn do_something(&self) { unsafe { println!("{:?}", _mm256_setzero_ps()); } } } #[inline(never)] fn dosomething<S: Simd>(simd: &S) { simd.do_something(); } fn main() { /* // fails to compile Avx {}; */ if is_x86_feature_detected!("avx") { let avx = unsafe { Avx {} }; dosomething(&avx); dosomething(&WithAvx { avx }); } if is_x86_feature_detected!("sse") { dosomething(&unsafe { Sse {} }) } } ``` Tracking: - rust-lang#129107
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
Aug 28, 2024
Implement a first version of RFC 3525: struct target features This PR is an attempt at implementing rust-lang/rfcs#3525, behind a feature gate `struct_target_features`. There's obviously a few tasks that ought to be done before this is merged; in no particular order: - add proper error messages - add tests - create a tracking issue for the RFC - properly serialize/deserialize the new target_features field in `rmeta` (assuming I even understood that correctly :-)) That said, as I am definitely not a `rustc` expert, I'd like to get some early feedback on the overall approach before fixing those things (and perhaps some pointers for `rmeta`...), hence this early PR :-) Here's an example piece of code that I have been using for testing - with the new code, the calls to intrinsics get correctly inlined: ```rust #![feature(struct_target_features)] use std::arch::x86_64::*; /* // fails to compile #[target_feature(enable = "avx")] struct Invalid(u32); */ #[target_feature(enable = "avx")] struct Avx {} #[target_feature(enable = "sse")] struct Sse(); /* // fails to compile extern "C" fn bad_fun(_: Avx) {} */ /* // fails to compile #[inline(always)] fn inline_fun(_: Avx) {} */ trait Simd { fn do_something(&self); } impl Simd for Avx { fn do_something(&self) { unsafe { println!("{:?}", _mm256_setzero_ps()); } } } impl Simd for Sse { fn do_something(&self) { unsafe { println!("{:?}", _mm_setzero_ps()); } } } struct WithAvx { #[allow(dead_code)] avx: Avx, } impl Simd for WithAvx { fn do_something(&self) { unsafe { println!("{:?}", _mm256_setzero_ps()); } } } #[inline(never)] fn dosomething<S: Simd>(simd: &S) { simd.do_something(); } fn main() { /* // fails to compile Avx {}; */ if is_x86_feature_detected!("avx") { let avx = unsafe { Avx {} }; dosomething(&avx); dosomething(&WithAvx { avx }); } if is_x86_feature_detected!("sse") { dosomething(&unsafe { Sse {} }) } } ``` Tracking: - rust-lang#129107
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
Aug 28, 2024
Implement a first version of RFC 3525: struct target features This PR is an attempt at implementing rust-lang/rfcs#3525, behind a feature gate `struct_target_features`. There's obviously a few tasks that ought to be done before this is merged; in no particular order: - add proper error messages - add tests - create a tracking issue for the RFC - properly serialize/deserialize the new target_features field in `rmeta` (assuming I even understood that correctly :-)) That said, as I am definitely not a `rustc` expert, I'd like to get some early feedback on the overall approach before fixing those things (and perhaps some pointers for `rmeta`...), hence this early PR :-) Here's an example piece of code that I have been using for testing - with the new code, the calls to intrinsics get correctly inlined: ```rust #![feature(struct_target_features)] use std::arch::x86_64::*; /* // fails to compile #[target_feature(enable = "avx")] struct Invalid(u32); */ #[target_feature(enable = "avx")] struct Avx {} #[target_feature(enable = "sse")] struct Sse(); /* // fails to compile extern "C" fn bad_fun(_: Avx) {} */ /* // fails to compile #[inline(always)] fn inline_fun(_: Avx) {} */ trait Simd { fn do_something(&self); } impl Simd for Avx { fn do_something(&self) { unsafe { println!("{:?}", _mm256_setzero_ps()); } } } impl Simd for Sse { fn do_something(&self) { unsafe { println!("{:?}", _mm_setzero_ps()); } } } struct WithAvx { #[allow(dead_code)] avx: Avx, } impl Simd for WithAvx { fn do_something(&self) { unsafe { println!("{:?}", _mm256_setzero_ps()); } } } #[inline(never)] fn dosomething<S: Simd>(simd: &S) { simd.do_something(); } fn main() { /* // fails to compile Avx {}; */ if is_x86_feature_detected!("avx") { let avx = unsafe { Avx {} }; dosomething(&avx); dosomething(&WithAvx { avx }); } if is_x86_feature_detected!("sse") { dosomething(&unsafe { Sse {} }) } } ``` Tracking: - rust-lang#129107
github-actions bot
pushed a commit
to rust-lang/miri
that referenced
this issue
Aug 29, 2024
Implement a first version of RFC 3525: struct target features This PR is an attempt at implementing rust-lang/rfcs#3525, behind a feature gate `struct_target_features`. There's obviously a few tasks that ought to be done before this is merged; in no particular order: - add proper error messages - add tests - create a tracking issue for the RFC - properly serialize/deserialize the new target_features field in `rmeta` (assuming I even understood that correctly :-)) That said, as I am definitely not a `rustc` expert, I'd like to get some early feedback on the overall approach before fixing those things (and perhaps some pointers for `rmeta`...), hence this early PR :-) Here's an example piece of code that I have been using for testing - with the new code, the calls to intrinsics get correctly inlined: ```rust #![feature(struct_target_features)] use std::arch::x86_64::*; /* // fails to compile #[target_feature(enable = "avx")] struct Invalid(u32); */ #[target_feature(enable = "avx")] struct Avx {} #[target_feature(enable = "sse")] struct Sse(); /* // fails to compile extern "C" fn bad_fun(_: Avx) {} */ /* // fails to compile #[inline(always)] fn inline_fun(_: Avx) {} */ trait Simd { fn do_something(&self); } impl Simd for Avx { fn do_something(&self) { unsafe { println!("{:?}", _mm256_setzero_ps()); } } } impl Simd for Sse { fn do_something(&self) { unsafe { println!("{:?}", _mm_setzero_ps()); } } } struct WithAvx { #[allow(dead_code)] avx: Avx, } impl Simd for WithAvx { fn do_something(&self) { unsafe { println!("{:?}", _mm256_setzero_ps()); } } } #[inline(never)] fn dosomething<S: Simd>(simd: &S) { simd.do_something(); } fn main() { /* // fails to compile Avx {}; */ if is_x86_feature_detected!("avx") { let avx = unsafe { Avx {} }; dosomething(&avx); dosomething(&WithAvx { avx }); } if is_x86_feature_detected!("sse") { dosomething(&unsafe { Sse {} }) } } ``` Tracking: - rust-lang/rust#129107
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
Aug 29, 2024
struct_target_features: reduce serialized rmeta Reduce the amount of serialized information in rmeta. This should fix the binary size regression in rust-lang#127537 and *may* also fix the speed regression. r? compiler-errors Tracking issue: rust-lang#129107
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
Aug 29, 2024
struct_target_features: reduce serialized rmeta Reduce the amount of serialized information in rmeta. This should fix the binary size regression in rust-lang#127537 and *may* also fix the speed regression. r? compiler-errors Tracking issue: rust-lang#129107
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
Aug 30, 2024
struct_target_features: cache feature computation. This commit moves the type-recursion to a query, causing it to be cached and (hopefully!) fixing the instruction-count regression from rust-lang#127537. r? compiler-errors Tracking issue: rust-lang#129107
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
Sep 2, 2024
Implement struct_target_features for non-generic functions. This PR implements a first version of RFC 3525. In particular, the current code does not handle structs with target features being passed to generic functions correctly. This is a roll-up of rust-lang#129764, rust-lang#129783 and rust-lang#129764, which will hopefully result in a PR that does not introduce perf regressions in the first place. r? Kobzol Tracking issue: rust-lang#129107
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
Sep 2, 2024
Implement struct_target_features for non-generic functions. This PR implements a first version of RFC 3525. In particular, the current code does not handle structs with target features being passed to generic functions correctly. This is a roll-up of rust-lang#129764, rust-lang#129783 and rust-lang#129764, which will hopefully result in a PR that does not introduce perf regressions in the first place. r? Kobzol Tracking issue: rust-lang#129107
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
Sep 10, 2024
Implement struct_target_features for non-generic functions. This PR implements a first version of RFC 3525. In particular, the current code does not handle structs with target features being passed to generic functions correctly. This is a roll-up of rust-lang#129764, rust-lang#129783 and rust-lang#129764, which will hopefully result in a PR that does not introduce perf regressions in the first place. r? Kobzol Tracking issue: rust-lang#129107
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
Sep 10, 2024
Implement struct_target_features for non-generic functions. This PR implements a first version of RFC 3525. In particular, the current code does not handle structs with target features being passed to generic functions correctly. This is a roll-up of rust-lang#129764, rust-lang#129783 and rust-lang#129764, which will hopefully result in a PR that does not introduce perf regressions in the first place. r? Kobzol Tracking issue: rust-lang#129107
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
Sep 13, 2024
Implement struct_target_features for non-generic functions. This PR implements a first version of RFC 3525. In particular, the current code does not handle structs with target features being passed to generic functions correctly. This is a roll-up of rust-lang#129764, rust-lang#129783 and rust-lang#129764, which will hopefully result in a PR that does not introduce perf regressions in the first place. r? Kobzol Tracking issue: rust-lang#129107
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
Oct 5, 2024
Implement struct_target_features. This PR implements a first version of RFC 3525. This is a roll-up of rust-lang#129764, rust-lang#129783 and rust-lang#129764, which will hopefully result in a PR that does not introduce perf regressions in the first place. This PR also includes code to handle generics, unlike the original PR, since doing so influenced the design of the original PR significantly. r? Kobzol Tracking issue: rust-lang#129107
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
Oct 5, 2024
Implement struct_target_features. This PR implements a first version of RFC 3525. This is a roll-up of rust-lang#129764, rust-lang#129783 and rust-lang#129764, which will hopefully result in a PR that does not introduce perf regressions in the first place. This PR also includes code to handle generics, unlike the original PR, since doing so influenced the design of the original PR significantly. r? Kobzol Tracking issue: rust-lang#129107
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
This is a tracking issue for the RFC "struct target features" (rust-lang/rfcs#3525).
The feature gate for the issue is
#![feature(struct_target_features)].About tracking issues
Tracking issues are used to record the overall progress of implementation.
They are also used as hubs connecting to other relevant issues, e.g., bugs or open design questions.
A tracking issue is however not meant for large scale discussion, questions, or bug reports about a feature.
Instead, open a dedicated issue for the specific matter and add the relevant feature gate label.
Discussion comments will get marked as off-topic or deleted.
Repeated discussions on the tracking issue may lead to the tracking issue getting locked.
Steps
Unresolved Questions
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: