Rename extern "unadjusted" to extern "llvm-intrinsic"

[bjorn3]

This makes it clear that it is only meant for LLVM intrinsics and not for defining or calling arbitrary user functions.

Follow up to #160077

[rustbot]

compiler-builtins is developed in its own repository. If possible, consider making this change to rust-lang/compiler-builtins instead.

cc @tgross35

This PR changes rustc_public

cc @oli-obk, @celinval, @ouz-a, @makai410

miri is developed in its own repository. If the Miri part of this change can be broken out, consider making this change to rust-lang/miri instead. However, if Miri needs adjusting for rustc changes, just ignore this message.

cc @rust-lang/miri

stdarch is developed in its own repository. If possible, consider making this change to rust-lang/stdarch instead.

cc @Amanieu, @folkertdev, @sayantn

[rustbot]

r? @tgross35

rustbot has assigned @tgross35.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

Why was this reviewer chosen?

The reviewer was selected based on:

• Owners of files modified in this PR: libs
• libs expanded to 12 candidates
• Random selection from JohnTitor, Mark-Simulacrum, clarfonthey, nia-e, tgross35

[RalfJung]

I love it. :)
I only carefully looked at the Miri parts, those LGTM.

View changes since this review

[bjorn3]

CI passed. @tgross35 would you be able to take a look soon. This PR is fairly large, so it may be a bit bitrot prone.

[tgross35]

LGTM from the standpoint of this just being a renaming, but we should make sure the regular stdarch maintainers are aware.

@folkertdev @adamgemmell @sayantn is stdarch reasonably up to date with r-l/r so this isn't going to cause conflicts with the next sync?

(r=me after one of them confirm)

@bors rollup=iffy p=5

View changes since this review

[folkertdev]

Yes, this shouldn't cause any (large) issues

@bors r=tgross35

[rust-bors]

📌 Commit 3f09e9e has been approved by tgross35

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[tgross35]

Bors preserves iffy/never but doesn't preserve priority?

@bors p=5

[Zalathar]

Bors preserves iffy/never but doesn't preserve priority?

I think it interpreted the “p=5” as a note explaining ”rollup=iffy”, instead of as a separate directive.

[rust-bors]

☀️ Test successful - CI
Approved by: tgross35
Duration: 3h 17m 43s
Pushing d0f2ef5 to main...

[github-actions]

What is this?

This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.

Comparing e457a7b (parent) -> d0f2ef5 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 8 test diffs

Stage 1

• [ui] tests/ui/feature-gates/feature-gate-abi_llvm-intrinsic.rs: [missing] -> pass (J0)
• [ui] tests/ui/feature-gates/feature-gate-abi_unadjusted.rs: pass -> [missing] (J0)
• [ui (polonius)] tests/ui/feature-gates/feature-gate-abi_llvm-intrinsic.rs: [missing] -> pass (J1)
• [ui (polonius)] tests/ui/feature-gates/feature-gate-abi_unadjusted.rs: pass -> [missing] (J1)

Stage 2

• [ui] tests/ui/feature-gates/feature-gate-abi_llvm-intrinsic.rs: [missing] -> pass (J2)
• [ui] tests/ui/feature-gates/feature-gate-abi_unadjusted.rs: pass -> [missing] (J2)

Additionally, 2 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Job group index

• J0: x86_64-gnu-llvm-21-3, x86_64-gnu-llvm-22-3, x86_64-gnu-next-trait-solver-polonius
• J1: x86_64-gnu-next-trait-solver-polonius
• J2: aarch64-apple-1, aarch64-apple-macos-26-1, aarch64-gnu, aarch64-gnu-llvm-21-1, aarch64-msvc-1, arm-android, armhf-gnu, i686-gnu-1, i686-gnu-nopt-1, i686-msvc-1, test-various, x86_64-gnu, x86_64-gnu-debug, x86_64-gnu-gcc, x86_64-gnu-llvm-21, x86_64-gnu-llvm-21-2, x86_64-gnu-llvm-22-2, x86_64-gnu-nopt, x86_64-gnu-parallel-frontend, x86_64-gnu-stable, x86_64-mingw-1, x86_64-msvc-1

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard d0f2ef5e53039bd86fdcaa6e71860c4948880e04 --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

1. x86_64-gnu-stdlib-semver-check: 10m 29s -> 18m 5s (+72.5%)
2. x86_64-gnu-gcc: 48m 57s -> 1h 21m (+66.6%)
3. x86_64-gnu-gcc-core-tests: 10m 45s -> 17m 41s (+64.5%)
4. x86_64-msvc-1: 1h 42m -> 2h 44m (+59.9%)
5. i686-msvc-1: 1h 53m -> 2h 57m (+55.7%)
6. test-various: 1h 36m -> 2h 17m (+43.1%)
7. dist-x86_64-msvc-alt: 2h 6m -> 2h 56m (+39.8%)
8. i686-gnu-nopt-2: 2h 23m -> 1h 27m (-38.6%)
9. x86_64-gnu-llvm-22-2: 1h 16m -> 1h 45m (+37.6%)
10. dist-x86_64-llvm-mingw: 1h 34m -> 2h 7m (+35.7%)

How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (d0f2ef5): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 2.6%, secondary -4.0%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.6%	[2.6%, 2.7%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.0%	[-6.5%, -1.5%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.6%	[2.6%, 2.7%]	2

Cycles

Results (primary -0.6%, secondary -3.6%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.6%	[2.6%, 2.6%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.1%	[-2.2%, -2.0%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.6%	[-3.6%, -3.6%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.6%	[-2.2%, 2.6%]	3

Binary size

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 476.343s -> 475.629s (-0.15%)
Artifact size: 402.74 MiB -> 402.76 MiB (0.00%)