Increase libffi version to 3.2 to support s390x

[uweigand]

libffi versions prior to 3.2 have no support for s390x, causing the Miri build to fail on our platform.

[rustbot]

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[rustbot]

These commits modify the Cargo.lock file. Random changes to Cargo.lock can be introduced when switching branches and rebasing PRs.
This was probably unintentional and should be reverted before this PR is merged.

If this was intentional then you can ignore this comment.

The Miri subtree was changed

cc @rust-lang/miri

[oli-obk]

I guess the miri repo will pick it up on the next sync, patching it here seems ok to me.

What do you think @rust-lang/miri ?

[uweigand]

I guess the miri repo will pick it up on the next sync, patching it here seems ok to me.

What do you think @rust-lang/miri ?

Ah, did I submit in the wrong place? If so, sorry - happy to resubmit to the miri repo ... Please let me know.

[oli-obk]

Ah, did I submit in the wrong place? If so, sorry - happy to resubmit to the miri repo ... Please let me know.

we don't have a strong policy, and I think it's fine here as it fixes it on nightly faster for you

[saethlin]

Yes I was about to type out the same answer as Oli. I think it is fine to land things here because it shows up in nightly faster and doesn't require us to do our by-hand sync first.

The sync process handles changes in both directions, so in my experience the best reason to land things in rust-lang/miri is that the developer experience is better.

[oli-obk]

@bors r+ rollup

[bors]

📌 Commit a553066 has been approved by oli-obk

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[compiler-errors]

This failed in a rollup

#109781 (comment)

@bors r-

[uweigand]

This fails due due:

  ../src/tramp.c:262:22: error: call to undeclared function 'open_temp_exec_file'; ISO C99 and later do not support implicit function declarations [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
    tramp_globals.fd = open_temp_exec_file ();
                       ^
  1 error generated.

Looks like libffi-rs 3.2 doesn't have this fix yet: https://github.com/libffi/libffi - I'll see how this can be fixed.

(Unfortunately this error didn't show up in my offline builds, apparently the builder uses stricter compiler settings ...)

[uweigand]

Let's try again with libffi-sys 2.2.1, which now has the clang-16 build error fixed.

[uweigand]

@oli-obk I've updated to libffi-sys 2.2.1, which fixes the clang-16 build failure. Can we put this back in the queue now and retry?

[oli-obk]

@bors r+ rollup=never

[bors]

📌 Commit 09541b5 has been approved by oli-obk

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 09541b5 with merge 48829ea...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: oli-obk
Pushing 48829ea to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (48829ea): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.9%	[0.5%, 1.3%]	7
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.9%	[2.9%, 2.9%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.1%	[-3.1%, -3.1%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.5%	[-2.5%, -2.5%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.1%	[-3.1%, 2.9%]	2

Cycles

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.