| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
This reverts commit a8ecb79d19e1bad732dae7f34f2481499db12f7c, reversing
changes made to 40c4e05013c1805044ae2611ba0b95c0acecd331.
(cherry picked from commit 9ea587e023dfa4458c5003ba74ae02bd146ec2df)
|
|
valtree performance tuning
Summary: This PR makes type checking of code with many type-level constants faster.
After https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/136180 was merged, we observed a small perf regression (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/136318#issuecomment-2635562821). This happened because that PR introduced additional copies in the fast reject code path for consts, which is very hot for certain crates: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/6c1d960d88dd3755548b3818630acb63fa98187e/compiler/rustc_type_ir/src/fast_reject.rs#L486-L487
This PR improves the performance again by properly interning the valtrees so that copying and comparing them becomes faster. This will become especially useful with `feature(adt_const_params)`, so the fast reject code doesn't have to do a deep compare of the valtrees.
Note that we can't just compare the interned consts themselves in the fast reject, because sometimes `'static` lifetimes in the type are be replaced with inference variables (due to canonicalization) on one side but not the other.
A less invasive alternative that I considered is simply avoiding copies introduced by https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/136180 and comparing the valtrees it in-place (see commit: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/commit/9e91e50ac5920f0b9b4a3b1e0880c85336ba5c64 / perf results: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/136593#issuecomment-2642303245), however that was still measurably slower than interning.
There are some minor regressions in secondary benchmarks: These happen due to changes in memory allocations and seem acceptable to me. The crates that make heavy use of valtrees show no significant changes in memory usage.
|
|
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #134999 (Add cygwin target.)
- #136559 (Resolve named regions when reporting type test failures in NLL)
- #136660 (Use a trait to enforce field validity for union fields + `unsafe` fields + `unsafe<>` binder types)
- #136858 (Parallel-compiler-related cleanup)
- #136881 (cg_llvm: Reduce visibility of all functions in the llvm module)
- #136888 (Always perform discr read for never pattern in EUV)
- #136948 (Split out the `extern_system_varargs` feature)
- #136949 (Fix import in bench for wasm)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
|
r=compiler-errors
Split out the `extern_system_varargs` feature
After the stabilization PR was opened, `extern "system"` functions were added to `extended_varargs_abi_support`. This has a number of questions regarding it that were not discussed and were somewhat surprising. It deserves to be considered as its own feature, separate from `extended_varargs_abi_support`.
Tracking issue:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/136946
|
|
Use a trait to enforce field validity for union fields + `unsafe` fields + `unsafe<>` binder types
This PR introduces a new, internal-only trait called `BikeshedGuaranteedNoDrop`[^1] to faithfully model the field check that used to be implemented manually by `allowed_union_or_unsafe_field`.
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/942db6782f4a28c55b0b75b38fd4394d0483390f/compiler/rustc_hir_analysis/src/check/check.rs#L84-L115
Copying over the doc comment from the trait:
```rust
/// Marker trait for the types that are allowed in union fields, unsafe fields,
/// and unsafe binder types.
///
/// Implemented for:
/// * `&T`, `&mut T` for all `T`,
/// * `ManuallyDrop<T>` for all `T`,
/// * tuples and arrays whose elements implement `BikeshedGuaranteedNoDrop`,
/// * or otherwise, all types that are `Copy`.
///
/// Notably, this doesn't include all trivially-destructible types for semver
/// reasons.
///
/// Bikeshed name for now.
```
As far as I am aware, there's no new behavior being guaranteed by this trait, since it operates the same as the manually implemented check. We could easily rip out this trait and go back to using the manually implemented check for union fields, however using a trait means that this code can be shared by WF for `unsafe<>` binders too. See the last commit.
The only diagnostic changes are that this now fires false-negatives for fields that are ill-formed. I don't consider that to be much of a problem though.
r? oli-obk
[^1]: Please let's not bikeshed this name lol. There's no good name for `ValidForUnsafeFieldsUnsafeBindersAndUnionFields`.
|
|
|
|
After the stabilization PR was opened, `extern "system"` functions were
added to `extended_varargs_abi_support`. This has a number of questions
regarding it that were not discussed and were somewhat surprising.
It deserves to be considered as its own feature, separate from
`extended_varargs_abi_support`.
|
|
|
|
r=compiler-errors
Fix cycle when debug-printing opaque types from RPITIT
Extend #66594 to opaque types from RPITIT.
Before this PR, enabling debug logging like `RUSTC_LOG="[check_type_bounds]"` for code containing RPITIT produces a query cycle of `explicit_item_bounds`, as pretty printing for opaque type calls [it](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/d9a4a47b8b3dc0bdff83360cea2013200d60d49c/compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/print/pretty.rs#L1001).
|
|
Reject `?Trait` bounds in various places where we unconditionally warned since 1.0
fixes #135730
fixes #135809
Also a breaking change, so let's see what crater says.
This has been an unconditional warning since *before* 1.0
|
|
|
|
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #134981 ( Explain that in paths generics can't be set on both the enum and the variant)
- #136698 (Replace i686-unknown-redox target with i586-unknown-redox)
- #136767 (improve host/cross target checking)
- #136829 ([rustdoc] Move line numbers into the `<code>` directly)
- #136875 (Rustc dev guide subtree update)
- #136900 (compiler: replace `ExternAbi::name` calls with formatters)
- #136913 (Put kobzol back on review rotation)
- #136915 (documentation fix: `f16` and `f128` are not double-precision)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
|
compiler: replace `ExternAbi::name` calls with formatters
Most of these just format the ABI string, so... just format ExternAbi? This makes it more consistent and less jank when we can do it.
|
|
Explain that in paths generics can't be set on both the enum and the variant
```
error[E0109]: type arguments are not allowed on tuple variant `TSVariant`
--> $DIR/enum-variant-generic-args.rs:54:29
|
LL | Enum::<()>::TSVariant::<()>(());
| --------- ^^ type argument not allowed
| |
| not allowed on tuple variant `TSVariant`
|
= note: generic arguments are not allowed on both an enum and its variant's path segments simultaneously; they are only valid in one place or the other
help: remove the generics arguments from one of the path segments
|
LL - Enum::<()>::TSVariant::<()>(());
LL + Enum::TSVariant::<()>(());
|
LL - Enum::<()>::TSVariant::<()>(());
LL + Enum::<()>::TSVariant(());
|
```
Fix #93993.
|
|
Revert "Stabilize `extended_varargs_abi_support`"
I cannot find an FCP for this, despite it being a stabilization PR which normally means we do an FCP of some kind? It would seem reasonable for _either_ compiler or lang to have FCPed it? I am thus opening a revert PR, which mostly-cleanly applies, so that we can later actually land this properly with a stability report and FCP.
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/136896
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116161
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/100189
|
|
Check sig for errors before checking for unconstrained anonymous lifetime
Fixes #136841
|
|
Most of these just format the ABI string, so... just format ExternAbi?
This makes it more consistent and less jank when we can do it.
|
|
This reverts commit 685f189b4307435b83d625fea397ef36dff4e955.
|
|
```
error[E0109]: type arguments are not allowed on tuple variant `TSVariant`
--> $DIR/enum-variant-generic-args.rs:54:29
|
LL | Enum::<()>::TSVariant::<()>(());
| --------- ^^ type argument not allowed
| |
| not allowed on tuple variant `TSVariant`
|
= note: generic arguments are not allowed on both an enum and its variant's path segments simultaneously; they are only valid in one place or the other
help: remove the generics arguments from one of the path segments
|
LL - Enum::<()>::TSVariant::<()>(());
LL + Enum::<()>::TSVariant(());
|
```
|
|
```
error[E0109]: type arguments are not allowed on enum `Enum` and tuple variant `TSVariant`
--> $DIR/enum-variant-generic-args.rs:54:12
|
LL | Enum::<()>::TSVariant::<()>(());
| ---- ^^ --------- ^^ type argument not allowed
| | |
| | not allowed on tuple variant `TSVariant`
| not allowed on enum `Enum`
|
= note: generic arguments are not allowed on both an enum and its variant's path segments simultaneously; they are only valid in one place or the other
help: remove the generics arguments from one of the path segments
|
LL - Enum::<()>::TSVariant::<()>(());
LL + Enum::<()>::TSVariant(());
|
```
Fix #93993.
|
|
|
|
|
|
since 1.0
|
|
associated types
|
|
r=compiler-errors
Introduce CoercePointeeWellformed for coherence checks at typeck stage
Fix #135206
This is the first PR to introduce the "wellformedness" check for `derive(CoercePointee)`.
This patch introduces a new error code to cover all the prerequisites of the said macro. The checks that is enforced with this patch is whether the data is indeed `struct` and whether the layout is set to `repr(transparent)`.
A following series of patch will arrive later to address the following concern.
1. #135217 so that we would only admit one single coercion on one type parameter, and leave the rest for future consideration in tandem of development of other coercion rules.
1. Enforcement of data field requirements.
**An open question** is whether there is a good schema to encode the `#[pointee]` as well, so that we could also check if the `#[pointee]` type parameter is indeed `?Sized`.
``@rustbot`` label F-derive_coerce_pointee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Always compute coroutine layout for eagerly emitting recursive layout errors
Detect recursive coroutine layouts even if we don't detect opaque type recursion in the new solver. This is for two reasons:
1. It helps us detect (bad) recursive async function calls in the new solver, which due to its approach to normalization causes us to not detect this via a recursive RPIT (since the opaques are more eagerly revealed in the opaque body).
* Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/137.
2. It helps us detect (bad) recursive async functions behind AFITs. See the AFIT test that changed for the old solver too.
3. It also greatly simplifies the recursive impl trait check, since I can remove some jankness around how it handles coroutines.
|
|
Fix `rustc_hidden_type_of_opaques` for RPITITs with no default body
Needed this when debugging something
|
|
|
|
#[contracts::requires(...)] + #[contracts::ensures(...)]
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/128044
Updated contract support: attribute syntax for preconditions and postconditions, implemented via a series of desugarings that culminates in:
1. a compile-time flag (`-Z contract-checks`) that, similar to `-Z ub-checks`, attempts to ensure that the decision of enabling/disabling contract checks is delayed until the end user program is compiled,
2. invocations of lang-items that handle invoking the precondition, building a checker for the post-condition, and invoking that post-condition checker at the return sites for the function, and
3. intrinsics for the actual evaluation of pre- and post-condition predicates that third-party verification tools can intercept and reinterpret for their own purposes (e.g. creating shims of behavior that abstract away the function body and replace it solely with the pre- and post-conditions).
Known issues:
* My original intent, as described in the MCP (https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/759) was to have a rustc-prefixed attribute namespace (like rustc_contracts::requires). But I could not get things working when I tried to do rewriting via a rustc-prefixed builtin attribute-macro. So for now it is called `contracts::requires`.
* Our attribute macro machinery does not provide direct support for attribute arguments that are parsed like rust expressions. I spent some time trying to add that (e.g. something that would parse the attribute arguments as an AST while treating the remainder of the items as a token-tree), but its too big a lift for me to undertake. So instead I hacked in something approximating that goal, by semi-trivially desugaring the token-tree attribute contents into internal AST constucts. This may be too fragile for the long-term.
* (In particular, it *definitely* breaks when you try to add a contract to a function like this: `fn foo1(x: i32) -> S<{ 23 }> { ... }`, because its token-tree based search for where to inject the internal AST constructs cannot immediately see that the `{ 23 }` is within a generics list. I think we can live for this for the short-term, i.e. land the work, and continue working on it while in parallel adding a new attribute variant that takes a token-tree attribute alongside an AST annotation, which would completely resolve the issue here.)
* the *intent* of `-Z contract-checks` is that it behaves like `-Z ub-checks`, in that we do not prematurely commit to including or excluding the contract evaluation in upstream crates (most notably, `core` and `std`). But the current test suite does not actually *check* that this is the case. Ideally the test suite would be extended with a multi-crate test that explores the matrix of enabling/disabling contracts on both the upstream lib and final ("leaf") bin crates.
|
|
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #136242 (Remove `LateContext::match_def_path()`)
- #136274 (Check Sizedness of return type in WF)
- #136284 (Allow using named consts in pattern types)
- #136477 (Fix a couple NLL TLS spans )
- #136497 (Report generic mismatches when calling bodyless trait functions)
- #136520 (Remove unnecessary layout assertions for object-safe receivers)
- #136526 (mir_build: Rename `thir::cx::Cx` to `ThirBuildCx` and remove `UserAnnotatedTyHelpers`)
Failed merges:
- #136304 (Reject negative literals for unsigned or char types in pattern ranges and literals)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
|
|
|
Allow using named consts in pattern types
This required a refactoring first: I had to stop using `hir::Pat`in `hir::TyKind::Pat` and instead create a separate `TyPat` that has `ConstArg` for range ends instead of `PatExpr`. Within the type system we should be using `ConstArg` for all constants, as otherwise we'd be maintaining two separate const systems that could diverge. The big advantage of this PR is that we now inherit all the rules from const generics and don't have a separate system. While this makes things harder for users (const generic rules wrt what is allowed in those consts), it also means we don't accidentally allow some things like referring to assoc consts or doing math on generic consts.
|
|
Check Sizedness of return type in WF
Still need to clean this up a bit. This should fix https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/150.
r? lcnr
|
|
Add `unchecked_disjoint_bitor` per ACP373
Following the names from libs-api in https://github.com/rust-lang/libs-team/issues/373#issuecomment-2085686057
Includes a fallback implementation so this doesn't have to update cg_clif or cg_gcc, and overrides it in cg_llvm to use `or disjoint`, which [is available in LLVM 18](https://releases.llvm.org/18.1.0/docs/LangRef.html#or-instruction) so hopefully we don't need any version checks.
|
|
|
|
1. Document the new intrinsics.
2. Make the intrinsics actually check the contract if enabled, and
remove `contract::check_requires` function.
3. Use panic with no unwind in case contract is using to check for
safety, we probably don't want to unwind. Following the same
reasoning as UB checks.
|
|
These are hooks to:
1. control whether contract checks are run
2. allow 3rd party tools to intercept and reintepret the results of running contracts.
|
|
|
|
LTA: Actually check where-clauses for well-formedness at the def site
All of the added tests used to wrongfully pass.
r? oli-obk or types/compiler or reassign
|
|
patterns
|
|
|
|
|
|
Make comma separated lists of anything easier to make for errors
Provide a new function `listify`, meant to be used in cases similar to `pluralize!`. When you have a slice of arbitrary elements that need to be presented to the user, `listify` allows you to turn that into a list of comma separated strings.
This reduces a lot of redundant logic that happens often in diagnostics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
