Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix dead link to the rustc_codegen_cranelift repo #73

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion docs/src/trophies.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -7,4 +7,4 @@ Has ABI Cafe helped you find/fix a bug in your compiler? We'd love to hear!
* We already knew clang and rustc disagreed [because clang does a manual alignment adjustment](https://reviews.llvm.org/D28990), but we didn't seem to fully understand that the clang adjustment is actually buggy and doesn't apply to the implicit push-to-stack when passing __int128 by-val. gcc always aligns the value, even when pushing to stack, so the two desync in this case.
* This tool was written to investigate the clang-rustc issue, and helped establish that everyone agreed on the ABI on ARM64, where __int128 is essentially part of the *hardware's* ABI due to it showing up in the layout for saving/restoring SIMD register state. As a result, [rust's libc crate now exposes typedefs for __int128 on those platforms](https://github.com/rust-lang/libc/pull/2719)

* [rustc_codegen_cranelift ICE on passing 11 bools by-val](https://github.com/bjorn3/rustc_codegen_cranelift/issues/1234)
* [rustc_codegen_cranelift ICE on passing 11 bools by-val](https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc_codegen_cranelift/issues/1234)