linux/scripts/generate_rust_analyzer.py, branch v6.14

scripts: generate_rust_analyzer: add uapi crate

2025-03-11T23:13:07Z

Commit 4e1746656839 ("rust: uapi: Add UAPI crate") did not update rust-analyzer to include the new crate. Add the missing definition to improve the developer experience. Fixes: 4e1746656839 ("rust: uapi: Add UAPI crate") Signed-off-by: Tamir Duberstein Tested-by: Andreas Hindborg Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250210-rust-analyzer-bindings-include-v2-2-23dff845edc3@gmail.com [ Slightly reworded title. - Miguel ] Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda

scripts: generate_rust_analyzer: add missing include_dirs

2025-03-11T23:12:58Z

Commit 8c4555ccc55c ("scripts: add `generate_rust_analyzer.py`") specified OBJTREE for the bindings crate, and `source.include_dirs` for the kernel crate, likely in an attempt to support out-of-source builds for those crates where the generated files reside in `objtree` rather than `srctree`. This was insufficient because both bits of configuration are required for each crate; the result is that rust-analyzer is unable to resolve generated files for either crate in an out-of-source build. [ Originally we were not using `OBJTREE` in the `kernel` crate, but we did pass the variable anyway, so conceptually it could have been there since then. Regarding `include_dirs`, it started in `kernel` before being in mainline because we included the bindings directly there (i.e. there was no `bindings` crate). However, when that crate got created, we moved the `OBJTREE` there but not the `include_dirs`. Nowadays, though, we happen to need the `include_dirs` also in the `kernel` crate for `generated_arch_static_branch_asm.rs` which was not there back then -- Tamir confirms it is indeed required for that reason. - Miguel ] Add the missing bits to improve the developer experience. Fixes: 8c4555ccc55c ("scripts: add `generate_rust_analyzer.py`") Signed-off-by: Tamir Duberstein Tested-by: Andreas Hindborg Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250210-rust-analyzer-bindings-include-v2-1-23dff845edc3@gmail.com [ Slightly reworded title. - Miguel ] Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda

scripts: generate_rust_analyzer: add missing macros deps

2025-03-11T22:37:45Z

The macros crate has depended on std and proc_macro since its introduction in commit 1fbde52bde73 ("rust: add `macros` crate"). These dependencies were omitted from commit 8c4555ccc55c ("scripts: add `generate_rust_analyzer.py`") resulting in missing go-to-definition and autocomplete, and false-positive warnings emitted from rust-analyzer such as: [{ "resource": "/Users/tamird/src/linux/rust/macros/module.rs", "owner": "_generated_diagnostic_collection_name_#1", "code": { "value": "non_snake_case", "target": { "$mid": 1, "path": "/rustc/", "scheme": "https", "authority": "doc.rust-lang.org", "query": "search=non_snake_case" } }, "severity": 4, "message": "Variable `None` should have snake_case name, e.g. `none`", "source": "rust-analyzer", "startLineNumber": 123, "startColumn": 17, "endLineNumber": 123, "endColumn": 21 }] Add the missing dependencies to improve the developer experience. [ Fiona had a different approach (thanks!) at: https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/20241205115438.234221-1-me@kloenk.dev/ But Tamir and Fiona agreed to this one. - Miguel ] Fixes: 8c4555ccc55c ("scripts: add `generate_rust_analyzer.py`") Reviewed-by: Fiona Behrens Diagnosed-by: Chayim Refael Friedman Link: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer/issues/17759#issuecomment-2646328275 Signed-off-by: Tamir Duberstein Tested-by: Andreas Hindborg Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250210-rust-analyzer-macros-core-dep-v3-1-45eb4836f218@gmail.com [ Removed `return`. Changed tag name. Added Link. Slightly reworded. - Miguel ] Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda

rust: use host dylib naming convention to support macOS

2025-01-10T00:01:24Z

Because the `macros` crate exposes procedural macros, it must be compiled as a dynamic library (so it can be loaded by the compiler at compile-time). Before this change the resulting artifact was always named `libmacros.so`, which works on hosts where this matches the naming convention for dynamic libraries. However the proper name on macOS would be `libmacros.dylib`. This turns out to matter even when the dependency is passed with a path (`--extern macros=path/to/libmacros.so` rather than `--extern macros`) because rustc uses the file name to infer the type of the library (see link). This is because there's no way to specify both the path to and the type of the external library via CLI flags. The compiler could speculatively parse the file to determine its type, but it does not do so today. This means that libraries that match neither rustc's naming convention for static libraries nor the platform's naming convention for dynamic libraries are *rejected*. The only solution I've found is to follow the host platform's naming convention. This patch does that by querying the compiler to determine the appropriate name for the artifact. This allows the kernel to build with CONFIG_RUST=y on macOS. Link: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/d829780/compiler/rustc_metadata/src/locator.rs#L728-L752 Tested-by: Daniel Gomez Co-developed-by: Fiona Behrens Signed-off-by: Fiona Behrens Signed-off-by: Tamir Duberstein Tested-by: Andreas Hindborg Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241216-b4-dylib-host-macos-v7-1-cfc507681447@gmail.com [ Added `MAKEFLAGS=`s to avoid jobserver warnings. Removed space. Reworded title. - Miguel ] Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda

kbuild: rust: remove the `alloc` crate and `GlobalAlloc`

2024-10-15T21:10:32Z

Now that we have our own `Allocator`, `Box` and `Vec` types we can remove Rust's `alloc` crate and the `new_uninit` unstable feature. Also remove `Kmalloc`'s `GlobalAlloc` implementation -- we can't remove this in a separate patch, since the `alloc` crate requires a `#[global_allocator]` to set, that implements `GlobalAlloc`. Signed-off-by: Danilo Krummrich Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241004154149.93856-29-dakr@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda

rust: Support latest version of `rust-analyzer`

2024-08-06T23:16:52Z

Sets the `sysroot` field in rust-project.json which is now needed in newer versions of rust-analyzer instead of the `sysroot_src` field. Till [1] `rust-analyzer` used to guess the `sysroot` based on the `sysroot_src` at [2]. Now `sysroot` is a required parameter for a `rust-project.json` file. It is required because `rust-analyzer` need it to find the proc-macro server [3]. In the current version of `rust-analyzer` the `sysroot_src` is only used to include the inbuilt library crates (std, core, alloc, etc) [4]. Since we already specify the core library to be included in the `rust-project.json` we don't need to define the `sysroot_src`. Code editors like VS Code try to use the latest version of rust-analyzer (which is updated every week) instead of the version of rust-analyzer that comes with the rustup toolchain (which is updated every six weeks along with the rust version). Without this change `rust-analyzer` is breaking for anyone using VS Code. As they are getting the latest version of `rust-analyzer` with the changes made in [1]. `rust-analyzer` will also start breaking for other developers as they update their rust version (assuming that also updates the rust-analyzer version on their system). This patch should work with every setup as there is no more guess work being done by `rust-analyzer`. [ Lukas, who leads the rust-analyzer team, says: `sysroot_src` is required now if you want to have the sysroot source libraries be loaded. I think we used to infer it as `{sysroot}/lib/rustlib/src/rust/library` before when only the `sysroot` field was given but that was since changed to make it possible in having a sysroot without the standard library sources (that is only have the binaries available). So if you want the library sources to be loaded by rust-analyzer you will have to set that field as well now. - Miguel ] Link: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer/pull/17287 [1] Link: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer/blob/f372a8a1176ff8dd5f45ab2ddd45f3530db0374f/crates/project-model/src/workspace.rs#L367-L374 [2] Link: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer/blob/eeb192b79aeac47b40add66347022af17a74fbaf/crates/project-model/src/sysroot.rs#L180-L192 [3] Link: https://github.com/search?q=repo%3AVeykril%2Frust-analyzer%20src_root()&type=code [4] Tested-by: Dirk Behme Signed-off-by: Sarthak Singh Link: https://rust-for-linux.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/291565-Help/topic/How.20to.20rust-analyzer.20correctly.20working Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240724172713.899399-1-sarthak.singh99@gmail.com [ Formatted comment, fixed typo and removed spurious empty line. - Miguel ] Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda

kbuild: use the upstream `alloc` crate

2024-04-16T20:03:14Z

Switch away from our fork of the `alloc` crate. We remove it altogether in the next commit. Signed-off-by: Wedson Almeida Filho Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240328013603.206764-4-wedsonaf@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda

scripts: generate_rust_analyzer: provide `cfg`s for `core` and `alloc`

2023-08-20T20:54:32Z

Both `core` and `alloc` have their `cfgs` (such as `no_rc`) missing in `rust-project.json`. To remedy this, pass the flags to `generate_rust_analyzer.py` for them to be added to a dictionary where each key corresponds to a crate and each value to a list of `cfg`s. The dictionary is then used to pass the `cfg`s to each crate in the generated file (for `core` and `alloc` only). Signed-off-by: Martin Rodriguez Reboredo Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230804171448.54976-1-yakoyoku@gmail.com [ Removed `Suggested-by` as discussed in mailing list. ] Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda

scripts: `make rust-analyzer` for out-of-tree modules

2023-08-07T09:33:34Z

Adds support for out-of-tree rust modules to use the `rust-analyzer` make target to generate the rust-project.json file. The change involves adding an optional parameter `external_src` to the `generate_rust_analyzer.py` which expects the path to the out-of-tree module's source directory. When this parameter is passed, I have chosen not to add the non-core modules (samples and drivers) into the result since these are not expected to be used in third party modules. Related changes are also made to the Makefile and rust/Makefile allowing the `rust-analyzer` target to be used for out-of-tree modules as well. Link: https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/pull/914 Link: https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/rust-out-of-tree-module/pull/2 Signed-off-by: Vinay Varma Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230411091714.130525-1-varmavinaym@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda

scripts: generate_rust_analyzer: Handle sub-modules with no Makefile

2023-04-06T22:53:34Z

More complex drivers might want to use modules to organize their Rust code, but those module folders do not need a Makefile. generate_rust_analyzer.py currently crashes on those. Fix it so that a missing Makefile is silently ignored. Link: https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/pull/883 Signed-off-by: Asahi Lina Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda