Rollup of 4 pull requests #146244
Closed
Rollup of 4 pull requests #146244
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
Allows users to link to Objective-C code using `@available(...)`.
…tgross35 Add `__isPlatformVersionAtLeast` and `__isOSVersionAtLeast` symbols ## Motivation When Objective-C code uses ``@available(...)`,` Clang inserts a call to [`__isPlatformVersionAtLeast`](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/llvmorg-20.1.0/compiler-rt/lib/builtins/os_version_check.c#L276) (`__isOSVersionAtLeast` in older Clang versions). These symbols not being available sometimes ends up causing linker errors. See the new test `tests/run-make/apple-c-available-links` for a minimal reproducer. The workaround is to link `libclang_rt.osx.a`, see e.g. alexcrichton/curl-rust#279. But that's very difficult for users to figure out (and the backreferences to that issue indicates that people are still running into this in their own projects every so often). For another recent example, this is preventing `rustc` from using LLVM assertions on macOS, see rust-lang#62592 (comment) and rust-lang#134275 (comment). It is also a blocker for [setting the correct minimum OS version in `cc-rs`](rust-lang#136113), since fixing this in `cc-rs` might end up introducing linker errors in places where we weren't before (by default, if using e.g. ``@available(macos` 10.15, *)`, the symbol usually happens to be left out, since `clang` defaults to compiling for the host macOS version, and thus things _seem_ to work - but the availability check actually compiles down to nothing, which is a huge correctness footgun for running on older OSes). (My super secret evil agenda is also to expose some variant of ``@available`` in Rust's `std` after rust-lang/rfcs#3750 progresses further, will probably file an ACP for this later. But I believe this PR has value regardless of those future plans, since we'd be making C/Objective-C/Swift interop easier). ## Solution Implement `__isPlatformVersionAtLeast` and `__isOSVersionAtLeast` as part of the "public ABI" that `std` exposes. **This is insta-stable**, in the same sense that additions to `compiler-builtins` are insta-stable, though the availability of these symbols can probably be considered a "quality of implementation" detail rather than a stable promise. I originally proposed to implement this in `compiler-builtins`, see rust-lang/compiler-builtins#794, but we discussed moving it to `std` instead ([Zulip thread](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/219381-t-libs/topic/Provide.20.60__isPlatformVersionAtLeast.60.20in.20.60std.60.3F/with/507880717)), which makes the implementation substantially simpler, and we avoid gnarly issues with requiring the user to link `libSystem.dylib` (since `std` unconditionally does that). Note that this does not solve the linker errors for (pure) `#![no_std]` users, but that's _probably_ fine, if you are using ``@available`` to test the OS version on Apple platforms, you're likely also using `std` (and it is still possible to work around by linking `libclang_rt.*.a`). A thing to note about the implementation, I've choosen to stray a bit from LLVM's upstream implementation, and not use `_availability_version_check` since [it has problems when compiling with an older SDK](llvm/llvm-project#64227). Instead, we use `sysctl kern.osproductversion` when available to still avoid the costly PList lookup in most cases, but still with a fall back to the PList lookup when that is not available (with the PList fallback being is similar to LLVM's implementation). ## Testing Apple has a lot of different "modes" that they can run binaries in, which can be a bit difficult to find your bearings in, but I've tried to be as thorough as I could in testing them all. Tested using roughly the equivalent of `./x test library/std -- platform_version` on the following configurations: - macOS 14.7.3 on a Macbook Pro M2 - `aarch64-apple-darwin` - `x86_64-apple-darwin` (under Rosetta) - `aarch64-apple-ios-macabi` - `x86_64-apple-ios-macabi` (under Rosetta) - `aarch64-apple-ios` (using Xcode's "Designed for iPad" setting) - `aarch64-apple-ios-sim` (in iOS Simulator, as iPhone with iOS 17.5) - `aarch64-apple-ios-sim` (in iOS Simulator, as iPad with iOS 18.2) - `aarch64-apple-tvos-sim` (in tvOS Simulator) - `aarch64-apple-watchos-sim` (in watchOS Simulator) - `aarch64-apple-ios-sim` (in visionOS simulator, using Xcode's "Designed for iPad" setting) - `aarch64-apple-visionos-sim` (in visionOS Simulator) - macOS 15.3.1 VM - `aarch64-apple-darwin` - `aarch64-apple-ios-macabi` - macOS 10.12.6 on an Intel Macbook from 2013 - `x86_64-apple-darwin` - `i686-apple-darwin` - `x86_64-apple-ios` (in iOS Simulator) - iOS 9.3.6 on a 1st generation iPad Mini - `armv7-apple-ios` with an older compiler Along with manually inspecting the output of `version_from_sysctl()` and `version_from_plist()`, and verifying that they actually match what's expected. I believe the only real omissions here would be: - `aarch64-apple-ios` on a newer iPhone that has `sysctl` available (iOS 11.4 or above). - `aarch64-apple-ios` on a Vision Pro using Xcode's "Designed for iPad" setting. But I don't have the hardware available to test those. `@rustbot` label O-apple A-linkage -T-compiler -A-meta -A-run-make try-job: aarch64-apple
…=Kobzol tidy: --bless now makes escheck run with --fix this mirrors how other extra-check tools work. unsure if this also needs to be done for tsc and es-check.
…r=petrochenkov fix: Filter suggestion parts that match existing code While testing my changes to make `rustc` use `annotate-snippets`, I encountered a new `clippy` test failure stemming from [two](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/145273/files#diff-6e8403e31463539666afbc00479cb416dc767a518f562b6e2960630953ee7da2R275-R278) [suggestion](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/145273/files#diff-6e8403e31463539666afbc00479cb416dc767a518f562b6e2960630953ee7da2R289-R292) output changes in rust-lang#145273. The new output in these two cases feels like a regression as it is not as clear as the old output, and adds unnecessary information. Before rust-lang#145273 (`Diff` style)  After rust-lang#145273 ("multi-line" style)  The reason for the change was that a new suggestion part (which matches existing code) was added on a different line than the existing parts, causing the suggestion style to change from `Diff` to "multi-line". Since this new part matches existing code, no code changes show up in the output for it, but it still makes the suggestion style "multi-line" when it doesn't need to be. To get the old output back, I made it so that suggestion parts that perfectly match existing code get filtered out. try-job: aarch64-apple
rustc_infer: change top-level doc comment to inner
rustbot
added
A-meta
|
@bors r+ rollup=never p=5 |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 5, 2025
Rollup of 4 pull requests Successful merges: - #138944 (Add `__isPlatformVersionAtLeast` and `__isOSVersionAtLeast` symbols) - #146041 (tidy: --bless now makes escheck run with --fix) - #146121 (fix: Filter suggestion parts that match existing code) - #146241 (rustc_infer: change top-level doc comment to inner) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
@bors retry |
bors
removed
the
S-waiting-on-review
bors
added
the
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 5, 2025
Rollup of 4 pull requests Successful merges: - #138944 (Add `__isPlatformVersionAtLeast` and `__isOSVersionAtLeast` symbols) - #146041 (tidy: --bless now makes escheck run with --fix) - #146121 (fix: Filter suggestion parts that match existing code) - #146241 (rustc_infer: change top-level doc comment to inner) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
bors
added
S-waiting-on-author
|
Kick out of queue. @bors retry |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
fmease
added
S-waiting-on-author
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:
__isPlatformVersionAtLeastand__isOSVersionAtLeastsymbols #138944 (Add__isPlatformVersionAtLeastand__isOSVersionAtLeastsymbols)r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup