| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
safe transmute: support non-ZST, variantful, uninhabited enums
Previously, `Tree::from_enum`'s implementation branched into three disjoint cases:
1. enums that uninhabited
2. enums for which all but one variant is uninhabited
3. enums with multiple variants
This branching (incorrectly) did not differentiate between variantful and variantless uninhabited enums. In both cases, we assumed (and asserted) that uninhabited enums are zero-sized types. This assumption is false for enums like:
enum Uninhabited { A(!, u128) }
...which, currently, has the same size as `u128`. This faulty assumption manifested as the ICE reported in #126460.
In this PR, we revise the first case of `Tree::from_enum` to consider only the narrow category of "enums that are uninhabited ZSTs". These enums, whose layouts are described with `Variants::Single { index }`, are special in their layouts otherwise resemble the `!` type and cannot be descended into like typical enums. This first case captures uninhabited enums like:
enum Uninhabited { A(!, !), B(!) }
The second case is revised to consider the broader category of "enums that defer their layout to one of their variants"; i.e., enums whose layouts are described with `Variants::Single { index }` and that do have a variant at `index`. This second case captures uninhabited enums that are not ZSTs, like:
enum Uninhabited { A(!, u128) }
...which represent their variants with `Variants::Single`.
Finally, the third case is revised to cover the broader category of "enums with multiple variants", which captures uninhabited enums like:
enum Uninhabited { A(u8, !), B(!, u32) }
...which represent their variants with `Variants::Multiple`.
This PR also adds a comment requested by ````@RalfJung```` in his review of #126358 to `compiler/rustc_const_eval/src/interpret/discriminant.rs`.
Fixes #126460
r? ````@compiler-errors````
|
|
|
|
This paves the way for tracking more state (e.g. error tainting) in the diagnostic context handle
|
|
Rename `InstanceDef` -> `InstanceKind`
Renames `InstanceDef` to `InstanceKind`. The `Def` here is confusing, and makes it hard to distinguish `Instance` and `InstanceDef`. `InstanceKind` makes this more obvious, since it's really just describing what *kind* of instance we have.
Not sure if this is large enough to warrant a types team MCP -- it's only 53 files. I don't personally think it does, but happy to write one if anyone disagrees. cc ``@rust-lang/types``
r? types
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #125829 (rustc_span: Add conveniences for working with span formats)
- #126361 (Unify intrinsics body handling in StableMIR)
- #126417 (Add `f16` and `f128` inline ASM support for `x86` and `x86-64`)
- #126424 ( Also sort `crt-static` in `--print target-features` output)
- #126428 (Polish `std::path::absolute` documentation.)
- #126429 (Add `f16` and `f128` const eval for binary and unary operationations)
- #126448 (End support for Python 3.8 in tidy)
- #126488 (Use `std::path::absolute` in bootstrap)
- #126511 (.mailmap: Associate both my work and my private email with me)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
|
Add `f16` and `f128` const eval for binary and unary operationations
Add const evaluation and Miri support for f16 and f128, including unary and binary operations. Casts are not yet included.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/124583
r? ``@RalfJung``
|
|
MIR Shl/Shr: the offset can be computed with rem_euclid
r? ````@scottmcm````
|
|
Previously, `Tree::from_enum`'s implementation branched into three disjoint
cases:
1. enums that uninhabited
2. enums for which all but one variant is uninhabited
3. enums with multiple inhabited variants
This branching (incorrectly) did not differentiate between variantful and
variantless uninhabited enums. In both cases, we assumed (and asserted) that
uninhabited enums are zero-sized types. This assumption is false for enums like:
enum Uninhabited { A(!, u128) }
...which, currently, has the same size as `u128`. This faulty assumption
manifested as the ICE reported in #126460.
In this PR, we revise the first case of `Tree::from_enum` to consider only the
narrow category of "enums that are uninhabited ZSTs". These enums, whose layouts
are described with `Variants::Single { index }`, are special in their layouts
otherwise resemble the `!` type and cannot be descended into like typical enums.
This first case captures uninhabited enums like:
enum Uninhabited { A(!, !), B(!) }
The second case is revised to consider the broader category of "enums that defer
their layout to one of their variants"; i.e., enums whose layouts are described
with `Variants::Single { index }` and that do have a variant at `index`. This
second case captures uninhabited enums that are not ZSTs, like:
enum Uninhabited { A(!, u128) }
...which represent their variants with `Variants::Single`.
Finally, the third case is revised to cover the broader category of "enums with
multiple variants", which captures uninhabited, non-ZST enums like:
enum Uninhabited { A(u8, !), B(!, u32) }
...which represent their variants with `Variants::Multiple`.
This PR also adds a comment requested by RalfJung in his review of #126358 to
`compiler/rustc_const_eval/src/interpret/discriminant.rs`.
Fixes #126460
|
|
|
|
Add a spot that was missed in
<https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/121997>.
|
|
This excludes casting, which needs more tests.
|
|
const validation: fix ICE on dangling ZST reference
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/126393
I'm not super happy with this fix but I can't think of a better one.
r? `@oli-obk`
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-> CompileTimeInterpCx
to match the terms used in the shared interpreter infrastructure
|
|
r=oli-obk
interpret: update doc comment for find_closest_untracked_caller_location
Also add a doc comment to cur_span.
r? `@compiler-errors`
|
|
|
|
safe transmute: support `Single` enums
Previously, the implementation of `Tree::from_enum` incorrectly treated enums with `Variants::Single` and `Variants::Multiple` identically. This is incorrect for `Variants::Single` enums, which delegate their layout to that of a variant with a particular index (or no variant at all if the enum is empty).
This flaw manifested first as an ICE. `Tree::from_enum` attempted to compute the tag of variants other than the one at `Variants::Single`'s `index`, and fell afoul of a sanity-checking assertion in `compiler/rustc_const_eval/src/interpret/discriminant.rs`. This assertion is non-load-bearing, and can be removed; the routine its in is well-behaved even without it.
With the assertion removed, the proximate issue becomes apparent: calling `Tree::from_variant` on a variant that does not exist is ill-defined. A sanity check the given variant has `FieldShapes::Arbitrary` fails, and the analysis is (correctly) aborted with `Err::NotYetSupported`.
This commit corrects this chain of failures by ensuring that `Tree::from_variant` is not called on variants that are, as far as layout is concerned, nonexistent. Specifically, the implementation of `Tree::from_enum` is now partitioned into three cases:
1. enums that are uninhabited
2. enums for which all but one variant is uninhabited
3. enums with multiple inhabited variants
`Tree::from_variant` is now only invoked in the third case. In the first case, `Tree::uninhabited()` is produced. In the second case, the layout is delegated to `Variants::Single`'s index.
Fixes #125811
|
|
Add Option::is_none_or
ACP: https://github.com/rust-lang/libs-team/issues/212
|
|
Previously, the implementation of `Tree::from_enum` incorrectly
treated enums with `Variants::Single` and `Variants::Multiple`
identically. This is incorrect for `Variants::Single` enums,
which delegate their layout to that of a variant with a particular
index (or no variant at all if the enum is empty).
This flaw manifested first as an ICE. `Tree::from_enum` attempted
to compute the tag of variants other than the one at
`Variants::Single`'s `index`, and fell afoul of a sanity-checking
assertion in `compiler/rustc_const_eval/src/interpret/discriminant.rs`.
This assertion is non-load-bearing, and can be removed; the routine
its in is well-behaved even without it.
With the assertion removed, the proximate issue becomes apparent:
calling `Tree::from_variant` on a variant that does not exist is
ill-defined. A sanity check the given variant has
`FieldShapes::Arbitrary` fails, and the analysis is (correctly)
aborted with `Err::NotYetSupported`.
This commit corrects this chain of failures by ensuring that
`Tree::from_variant` is not called on variants that are, as far as
layout is concerned, nonexistent. Specifically, the implementation
of `Tree::from_enum` is now partitioned into three cases:
1. enums that are uninhabited
2. enums for which all but one variant is uninhabited
3. enums with multiple inhabited variants
`Tree::from_variant` is now only invoked in the third case. In the
first case, `Tree::uninhabited()` is produced. In the second case,
the layout is delegated to `Variants::Single`'s index.
Fixes #125811
|
|
|
|
interpret: dyn trait metadata check: equate traits in a proper way
Hopefully fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/3541... unfortunately we don't have a testcase.
The first commit is just a refactor without functional change.
r? `@oli-obk`
|
|
We already do this for a number of crates, e.g. `rustc_middle`,
`rustc_span`, `rustc_metadata`, `rustc_span`, `rustc_errors`.
For the ones we don't, in many cases the attributes are a mess.
- There is no consistency about order of attribute kinds (e.g.
`allow`/`deny`/`feature`).
- Within attribute kind groups (e.g. the `feature` attributes),
sometimes the order is alphabetical, and sometimes there is no
particular order.
- Sometimes the attributes of a particular kind aren't even grouped
all together, e.g. there might be a `feature`, then an `allow`, then
another `feature`.
This commit extends the existing sorting to all compiler crates,
increasing consistency. If any new attribute line is added there is now
only one place it can go -- no need for arbitrary decisions.
Exceptions:
- `rustc_log`, `rustc_next_trait_solver` and `rustc_type_ir_macros`,
because they have no crate attributes.
- `rustc_codegen_gcc`, because it's quasi-external to rustc (e.g. it's
ignored in `rustfmt.toml`).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
interpret: do not ICE on padded non-pow2 SIMD vectors
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/3458
r? ``@oli-obk``
|
|
We can check that the vtable is for the right trait very early, and then just pass the type around.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This reverts commit ddc5f9b6c1f21da5d4596bf7980185a00984ac42.
|
|
Unsafe extern blocks
This implements RFC 3484.
Tracking issue #123743 and RFC https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3484
This is better reviewed commit by commit.
|
|
Remove the `ty` field from type system `Const`s
Fixes #125556
Fixes #122908
Part of the work on `adt_const_params`/`generic_const_param_types`/`min_generic_const_exprs`/generally making the compiler nicer. cc rust-lang/project-const-generics#44
Please review commit-by-commit otherwise I wasted a lot of time not just squashing this into a giant mess (and also it'll be SO much nicer because theres a lot of fluff changes mixed in with other more careful changes if looking via File Changes
---
Why do this?
- The `ty` field keeps causing ICEs and weird behaviour due to it either being treated as "part of the const" or it being forgotten about leading to ICEs.
- As we move forward with `adt_const_params` and a potential `min_generic_const_exprs` it's going to become more complex to actually lower the correct `Ty<'tcx>`
- It muddles the idea behind how we check `Const` arguments have the correct type. By having the `ty` field it may seem like we ought to be relating it when we relate two types, or that its generally important information about the `Const`.
- Brings the compiler more in line with `a-mir-formality` as that also tracks the type of type system `Const`s via `ConstArgHasType` bounds in the env instead of on the `Const` itself.
- A lot of stuff is a lot nicer when you dont have to pass around the type of a const lol. Everywhere we construct `Const` is now significantly nicer :sweat_smile:
See #125671's description for some more information about the `ty` field
---
General summary of changes in this PR:
- Add `Ty` to `ConstKind::Value` as otherwise there is no way to implement `ConstArgHasType` to ensure that const arguments are correctly typed for the parameter when we stop creating anon consts for all const args. It's also just incredibly difficult/annoying to thread the correct `Ty` around to a bunch of ctfe functions otherwise.
- Fully implement `ConstArgHasType` in both the old and new solver. Since it now has no reliance on the `ty` field it serves its originally intended purpose of being able to act as a double check that trait vs impls have correctly typed const parameters. It also will now be able to be responsible for checking types of const arguments to parameters under `min_generic_const_exprs`.
- Add `Ty` to `mir::Const::Ty`. I dont have a great understanding of why mir constants are setup like this to be honest. Regardless they need to be able to determine the type of the const and the easiest way to make this happen was to simply store the `Ty` along side the `ty::Const`. Maybe we can do better here in the future but I'd have to spend way more time looking at everywhere we use `mir::Const`.
- rustdoc has its own `Const` which also has a `ty` field. It was relatively easy to remove this.
---
r? `@lcnr` `@compiler-errors`
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Use parenthetical notation for `Fn` traits
Always use the `Fn(T) -> R` format when printing closure traits instead of `Fn<(T,), Output = R>`.
Address #67100:
```
error[E0277]: expected a `Fn()` closure, found `F`
--> file.rs:6:13
|
6 | call_fn(f)
| ------- ^ expected an `Fn()` closure, found `F`
| |
| required by a bound introduced by this call
|
= note: wrap the `F` in a closure with no arguments: `|| { /* code */ }`
note: required by a bound in `call_fn`
--> file.rs:1:15
|
1 | fn call_fn<F: Fn() -> ()>(f: &F) {
| ^^^^^^^^^^ required by this bound in `call_fn`
help: consider further restricting this bound
|
5 | fn call_any<F: std::any::Any + Fn()>(f: &F) {
| ++++++
```
|
|
|
|
Always use the `Fn(T) -> R` format when printing closure traits instead of `Fn<(T,), Output = R>`.
Fix #67100:
```
error[E0277]: expected a `Fn()` closure, found `F`
--> file.rs:6:13
|
6 | call_fn(f)
| ------- ^ expected an `Fn()` closure, found `F`
| |
| required by a bound introduced by this call
|
= note: wrap the `F` in a closure with no arguments: `|| { /* code */ }`
note: required by a bound in `call_fn`
--> file.rs:1:15
|
1 | fn call_fn<F: Fn() -> ()>(f: &F) {
| ^^^^^^^^^^ required by this bound in `call_fn`
help: consider further restricting this bound
|
5 | fn call_any<F: std::any::Any + Fn()>(f: &F) {
| ++++++
```
|
|
miri: avoid making a full copy of all new allocations
Hopefully fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/3637
r? ``@saethlin``
|
|
|
|
|
|
The guarded call will ICE on its own.
While this improved diagnostics in the presence of bugs somewhat, it is also a blocker to query feeding of constants. If this case is hit again, we should instead improve diagnostics of the root ICE
|
