@@ -1743,20 +1743,18 @@ mod prim_ref {}
17431743/// alignment, they might be passed in different registers and hence not be ABI-compatible.
17441744///
17451745/// ABI compatibility as a concern only arises in code that alters the type of function pointers,
1746- /// code that imports functions via `extern` blocks, and in code that combines `#[target_feature]`
1747- /// with `extern fn`. Altering the type of function pointers is wildly unsafe (as in, a lot more
1748- /// unsafe than even [`transmute_copy`][mem::transmute_copy]), and should only occur in the most
1749- /// exceptional circumstances. Most Rust code just imports functions via `use`. `#[target_feature]`
1750- /// is also used rarely. So, most likely you do not have to worry about ABI compatibility.
1746+ /// and code that imports functions via `extern` blocks. Altering the type of function pointers is
1747+ /// wildly unsafe (as in, a lot more unsafe than even [`transmute_copy`][mem::transmute_copy]), and
1748+ /// should only occur in the most exceptional circumstances. Most Rust code just imports functions
1749+ /// via `use`. So, most likely you do not have to worry about ABI compatibility.
17511750///
17521751/// But assuming such circumstances, what are the rules? For this section, we are only considering
17531752/// the ABI of direct Rust-to-Rust calls, not linking in general -- once functions are imported via
17541753/// `extern` blocks, there are more things to consider that we do not go into here.
17551754///
17561755/// For two signatures to be considered *ABI-compatible*, they must use a compatible ABI string,
1757- /// must take the same number of arguments, the individual argument types and the return types must
1758- /// be ABI-compatible, and the target feature requirements must be met (see the subsection below for
1759- /// the last point). The ABI string is declared via `extern "ABI" fn(...) -> ...`; note that
1756+ /// must take the same number of arguments, and the individual argument types and the return types
1757+ /// must be ABI-compatible. The ABI string is declared via `extern "ABI" fn(...) -> ...`; note that
17601758/// `fn name(...) -> ...` implicitly uses the `"Rust"` ABI string and `extern fn name(...) -> ...`
17611759/// implicitly uses the `"C"` ABI string.
17621760///
@@ -1826,24 +1824,6 @@ mod prim_ref {}
18261824/// Behavior since transmuting `None::<NonZero<i32>>` to `NonZero<i32>` violates the non-zero
18271825/// requirement.
18281826///
1829- /// #### Requirements concerning target features
1830- ///
1831- /// Under some conditions, the signature used by the caller and the callee can be ABI-incompatible
1832- /// even if the exact same ABI string and types are being used. As an example, the
1833- /// `std::arch::x86_64::__m256` type has a different `extern "C"` ABI when the `avx` feature is
1834- /// enabled vs when it is not enabled.
1835- ///
1836- /// Therefore, to ensure ABI compatibility when code using different target features is combined
1837- /// (such as via `#[target_feature]`), we further require that one of the following conditions is
1838- /// met:
1839- ///
1840- /// - The function uses the `"Rust"` ABI string (which is the default without `extern`).
1841- /// - Caller and callee are using the exact same set of target features. For the callee we consider
1842- /// the features enabled (via `#[target_feature]` and `-C target-feature`/`-C target-cpu`) at the
1843- /// declaration site; for the caller we consider the features enabled at the call site.
1844- /// - Neither any argument nor the return value involves a SIMD type (`#[repr(simd)]`) that is not
1845- /// behind a pointer indirection (i.e., `*mut __m256` is fine, but `(i32, __m256)` is not).
1846- ///
18471827/// ### Trait implementations
18481828///
18491829/// In this documentation the shorthand `fn(T₁, T₂, …, Tₙ)` is used to represent non-variadic
0 commit comments