Open RalfJung opened 1 week ago
This issue is not meant to be used for technical discussion. There is a Zulip stream for that. Use this issue to leave procedural comments, such as volunteering to review, indicating that you second the proposal (or third, etc), or raising a concern that you would like to be addressed.
Concerns or objections to the proposal should be discussed on Zulip and formally registered here by adding a comment with the following syntax:
@rustbot concern reason-for-concern
<description of the concern>
Concerns can be lifted with:
@rustbot resolve reason-for-concern
See documentation at https://forge.rust-lang.org
cc @rust-lang/compiler
@rustbot second
Proposal
Passing
-Ctarget-feature=-sse
on an x86-64 target currently produces an ugly LLVM error. Doing the same on a x86-32 target leads to unsound floating-point behavior.Therefore, I think we should deprecate and eventually fully forbid toggling the
sse
/sse2
target features on x86 targets, except for those targets that do not have these features to begin with (e.g.i586-unknown-linux-gnu
).Here, compiler team triage decided "Current Tier 1 x86 targets require SSE-based floats at minimum"; this MCP is basically intended reaffirm that position with a more formal process.
I am implementing some machinery here that could help with that, but properly implementing this will be tricky since one can also use
-Ctarget-cpu
to disable these target features.Once this is implemented, we have some options for improving the Rust ABI on these targets as well:
PassMode::Indirect
Mentors or Reviewers
If you have a reviewer or mentor in mind for this work, mention them here. You can put your own name here if you are planning to mentor the work.
Process
The main points of the Major Change Process are as follows:
@rustbot second
.-C flag
, then full team check-off is required.@rfcbot fcp merge
on either the MCP or the PR.You can read more about Major Change Proposals on forge.
Comments
This issue is not meant to be used for technical discussion. There is a Zulip stream for that. Use this issue to leave procedural comments, such as volunteering to review, indicating that you second the proposal (or third, etc), or raising a concern that you would like to be addressed.