Autodiff Upstreaming - enzyme backend

[ZuseZ4]

Tracking issue: #124509

Part of #129175

This PR should allow building Enzyme from source on Tier 1 targets (when also building LLVM), except MSVC.
It's only a small fraction (~200 lines) of the whole upstream PR, but due to bootstrapping and the number of configurations in which rustc can be build I assume that this will be the hardest to merge, so I'm starting with it.
Happy to hear what changes are required to be able to upstream this code.

Content:
It contains a new configure flag --enable-llvm-enzyme, and will build the new Enzyme submodule when it is set.

Discussion:
Apparently Rust CI isn't able to clone repositories outside the rust-lang org? At least I'm seeing this error in CI:

[email protected]: Permission denied (publickey).
fatal: Could not read from remote repository.

Please make sure you have the correct access rights
and the repository exists.

Does that mean we would need to mirror github.com/EnzymeAD/Enzyme in rust-lang, until LLVM upgrades Enzyme from an Incubator project to something that ships as part of the monorepo?

Tracking:

• Tracking Issue for autodiff #124509

[rustbot]

r? @albertlarsan68

rustbot has assigned @albertlarsan68.
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

[rustbot]

⚠️ Warning ⚠️

• These commits modify submodules.

[Kobzol]

Use HTTPS instead of SSH authentication for the git repo, then it should work.

[Kobzol]

You should probably add an ignore for the enzyme submodule in tidy.

[rustbot]

This PR changes how LLVM is built. Consider updating src/bootstrap/download-ci-llvm-stamp.

This PR modifies src/bootstrap/src/core/config.

If appropriate, please update CONFIG_CHANGE_HISTORY in src/bootstrap/src/utils/change_tracker.rs.

[ZuseZ4]

Thank you two for already having looked at it. CI passes now, how would we continue?

We probably only want to configure the llvm_enzyme flag as enabled for nightly builds shipped to users once all the other code including tests are moved over to rustc. So from my side, I would be fine with squashing and merging this and putting up the next PR which would include our autodiff rustc_builtin_macro. The frontend is pretty lightweight to build, so we could already enable it by default and just error out in the middle-end, similar to how f128 did it (still do it?).

[rustbot]

This PR modifies config.example.toml.

If appropriate, please update CONFIG_CHANGE_HISTORY in src/bootstrap/src/utils/change_tracker.rs.

[rustbot]

There are merge commits (commits with multiple parents) in your changes. We have a no merge policy so these commits will need to be removed for this pull request to be merged.

You can start a rebase with the following commands:

$ # rebase
$ git pull --rebase https://github.com/rust-lang/rust.git master
$ git push --force-with-lease

The following commits are merge commits:

• 2bb72b2

[ZuseZ4]

I guess I shouldn't use the GUI here to resolve merge conflicts, lesson learned.
I intend clean the history up once this PR got approved to not disturb anyone reviewing, but I can also do it now if anyone prefers that.
(I had picked 4 more lines (in src/bootstrap/configure.py and config.example.toml) from the full PR to this one and adjusted the change_tracker accordingly based on the bot feedback I got above, but this caused the merge conflict).

[bors]

📌 Commit 14e8f45 has been approved by albertlarsan68

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[traviscross]

@bors rollup=never

[traviscross]

@bors r=albertlarsan68 p=1

(This seems likely to attract conflicts. The latest push was due to such a conflict developing while in queue.)

[bors]

📌 Commit 4f5c16d has been approved by albertlarsan68

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 4f5c16d with merge f6e192a...

[rust-log-analyzer]

The job x86_64-msvc-ext failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

[RUSTC-TIMING] miri test:false 4.457
error: failed to remove file `C:\a\rust\rust\build\x86_64-pc-windows-msvc\stage1-tools\x86_64-pc-windows-msvc\release\miri.exe`

Caused by:
  Access is denied. (os error 5)
Command has failed. Rerun with -v to see more details.
  local time: Fri, Sep  6, 2024  7:16:49 AM
  network time: Fri, 06 Sep 2024 07:16:49 GMT
##[error]Process completed with exit code 1.
Post job cleanup.

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[traviscross]

@bors retry

cc #127883

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 4f5c16d with merge 59d4114...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: albertlarsan68
Pushing 59d4114 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (59d4114): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - 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
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.6%	[-3.6%, -3.6%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 2.2%, secondary -2.4%)

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)	2.2%	[2.2%, 2.2%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.4%	[-2.6%, -2.1%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.2%	[2.2%, 2.2%]	1

Cycles

Results (secondary 2.7%)

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)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.7%	[2.3%, 3.0%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 754.927s -> 756.647s (0.23%)
Artifact size: 340.95 MiB -> 340.92 MiB (-0.01%)