-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15k
rustc should use vendor names for target features #61895
Copy link
Copy link
Closed
Labels
A-driverArea: rustc_driver that ties everything together into the `rustc` compilerArea: rustc_driver that ties everything together into the `rustc` compilerC-enhancementCategory: An issue proposing an enhancement or a PR with one.Category: An issue proposing an enhancement or a PR with one.T-compilerRelevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
A-driverArea: rustc_driver that ties everything together into the `rustc` compilerArea: rustc_driver that ties everything together into the `rustc` compilerC-enhancementCategory: An issue proposing an enhancement or a PR with one.Category: An issue proposing an enhancement or a PR with one.T-compilerRelevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Type
Fields
Give feedbackNo fields configured for issues without a type.
Right now in source code we follow vendor names and not LLVM ones (e.g.
rdrandand notrdrnd). Translation is handled here. But when enabling target feature viarustcflags we have to use LLVM names, i.e.-C target-feature=+rdrndand+rdrandwill not work. So we have inconsistency on our hands.At the very least vendor names provided in
rustcflags should be translated to LLVM ones. Additionally I think we should not expose LLVM names at all, including inrustc --print target-features.Relevant: #50077, #48369