diff options
| author | Matthias Krüger <matthias.krueger@famsik.de> | 2023-11-29 04:23:22 +0100 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | GitHub <noreply@github.com> | 2023-11-29 04:23:22 +0100 |
| commit | 92a74e41b6c0ec2a92d010a81ae6bd9f2f57264a (patch) | |
| tree | 58fbb97f9dadc0d511a8138713905400dc432ecf /tests/rustdoc-js-std/reference-shrink.js | |
| parent | 2eec51c27cae2df56fd5cb2085e60e18f7e68940 (diff) | |
| parent | 73042206ddfd2686eae6c9e186ef77ba2c08ddb5 (diff) | |
| download | rust-92a74e41b6c0ec2a92d010a81ae6bd9f2f57264a.tar.gz rust-92a74e41b6c0ec2a92d010a81ae6bd9f2f57264a.zip | |
Rollup merge of #118265 - RalfJung:memcpy, r=cuviper
remove the memcpy-on-equal-ptrs assumption One of the libc we support, musl, [defines `memcpy` with `restrict` pointers](https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/tree/src/string/memcpy.c#n5). This in fact matches the definition in the C standard. Calling that `memcpy` with overlapping pointers is clearly UB, who knows what the compiler did when optimizing this `memcpy` -- it certainly assumed source and destination to be disjoint. Lucky enough, it does not seem like we actually need this assumption that `memcpy(p, p, n)` is always allowed. clang and GCC need it since they use `memcpy` to compile C assignments, but [we use memmove for similar code](https://godbolt.org/z/bcW85WYcM). There are no known cases where LLVM introduces calls to memcpy on equal pointers itself. (And if there were, that would be a soundness bug in rustc due to the musl issue mentioned above.) This does mean we must make sure to never call the LLVM `memcpy` builtin on equal ranges even though the LangRef says that is allowed. Currently that is the case so we just need to make sure it remains the case. :) Cc `@rust-lang/opsem` `@rust-lang/wg-llvm`
Diffstat (limited to 'tests/rustdoc-js-std/reference-shrink.js')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions
