| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
No functional change in this commit
|
|
|
|
to build the C lib
|
|
|
|
|
|
cotrol stacked borrows consistency check with its own feature flag
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/3431
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
make some doc comments not doc tests
`./miri test --doc` will run doctests even if we have them disabled (that's a cargo quirk: https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/13668). This fixes that command to not fail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is an alternative to #121920
|
|
Stabilize `unchecked_{add,sub,mul}`
Tracking issue: #85122
I think we might as well just stabilize these basic three. They're the ones that have `nuw`/`nsw` flags in LLVM.
Notably, this doesn't include the potentially-more-complex or -more-situational things like `unchecked_neg` or `unchecked_shr` that are under different feature flags.
To quote Ralf https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/85122#issuecomment-1681669646,
> Are there any objections to stabilizing at least `unchecked_{add,sub,mul}`? For those there shouldn't be any surprises about what their safety requirements are.
*Semantially* these are [already available on stable, even in `const`, via](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=bdb1ff889b61950897f1e9f56d0c9a36) `checked_*`+`unreachable_unchecked`. So IMHO we might as well just let people write them directly, rather than try to go through a `let Some(x) = x.checked_add(y) else { unsafe { hint::unreachable_unchecked() }};` dance.
I added additional text to each method to attempt to better describe the behaviour and encourage `wrapping_*` instead.
r? rust-lang/libs-api
|
|
|
|
|
|
Codegen const panic messages as function calls
This skips emitting extra arguments at every callsite (of which there
can be many). For a librustc_driver build with overflow checks enabled,
this cuts 0.7MB from the resulting shared library (see [perf]).
A sample improvement from nightly:
```
leaq str.0(%rip), %rdi
leaq .Lalloc_d6aeb8e2aa19de39a7f0e861c998af13(%rip), %rdx
movl $25, %esi
callq *_ZN4core9panicking5panic17h17cabb89c5bcc999E@GOTPCREL(%rip)
```
to this PR:
```
leaq .Lalloc_d6aeb8e2aa19de39a7f0e861c998af13(%rip), %rdi
callq *_RNvNtNtCsduqIKoij8JB_4core9panicking11panic_const23panic_const_div_by_zero@GOTPCREL(%rip)
```
[perf]: https://perf.rust-lang.org/compare.html?start=a7e4de13c1785819f4d61da41f6704ed69d5f203&end=64fbb4f0b2d621ff46d559d1e9f5ad89a8d7789b&stat=instructions:u
|
|
enable cargo miri test doctests
This was the cleanest solution that came to my mind so far.
cc `@RalfJung`
Resolves #123028
|
|
test-cargo-miri: add proc-macro2
This is already in the dependency tree of `serde_derive`, but I guess there is is a host dependency, here it is a target dependency.
The logic is presumably the same as in anyhow, so we don't need both; let's test the one that is more widely used.
|
|
|
|
|
|
and remove serde_derive, since the --extern .so file was really just a consequence of building a proc macro
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
add eyre to test-cargo-miri
Same as anyhow: custom build probe, widely used.
|
|
|
|
Tree Borrows: Make tree root always be initialized
This PR fixes a slight annoyance we discovered while formally proving that certain optimizations are sound with Tree Borrows. In particular... (copied from the commit message):
There should never be an `Active` but not initialized node in the borrow tree. If such a node exists, and if it has a protector, then on a foreign read, it could become disabled. This leads to some problems when formally proving that read moving optimizations are sound.
The root node is the only node for which this can happen, since all other nodes can only become `Active` when actually used. But special-casing the root node here is annoying to reason about, everything becomes much nicer if we can simply say that *all* `Active` nodes must be initialized. This requires making the root node default-initialized.
This is also more intuitive, since the root arguably becomes initialized during the allocation, which can be considered a write.
|
|
There should never be an `Active` but not initialized node in the
borrow tree. If such a node exists, and if it has a protector, then
on a foreign read, it could become disabled. This leads to some
problems when formally proving that read-reordering optimizations are
sound.
The root node is the only node for which this can happen, since all
other nodes can only become `Active` when actually used. But special-
casing the root node here is annoying to reason about, everything
becomes much nicer if we can simply say that *all* `Active` nodes
must be initialized. This requires making the root node default-
initialized.
This is also more intuitive, since the root arguably becomes ini-
tialized during the allocation, which can be considered a write.
|
|
Rustup
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/123081 landed so hopefully this works now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed-off-by: onur-ozkan <work@onurozkan.dev>
|
|
|
|
Print a backtrace in const eval if interrupted
Demo:
```rust
#![feature(const_eval_limit)]
#![const_eval_limit = "0"]
const OW: u64 = {
let mut res: u64 = 0;
let mut i = 0;
while i < u64::MAX {
res = res.wrapping_add(i);
i += 1;
}
res
};
fn main() {
println!("{}", OW);
}
```
```
╭ ➜ ben@archlinux:~/rust
╰ ➤ rustc +stage1 spin.rs
^Cerror[E0080]: evaluation of constant value failed
--> spin.rs:8:33
|
8 | res = res.wrapping_add(i);
| ^ Compilation was interrupted
note: erroneous constant used
--> spin.rs:15:20
|
15 | println!("{}", OW);
| ^^
note: erroneous constant used
--> spin.rs:15:20
|
15 | println!("{}", OW);
| ^^
|
= note: this note originates in the macro `$crate::format_args_nl` which comes from the expansion of the macro `println` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
error: aborting due to previous error
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0080`.
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
phase_rustdoc: add a heuristic to make us more certain that this is really rustdoc
Also add anyhow to test-cargo-miri; it has a custom build probe and is widely used so let's make sure the build script does not fail.
|
|
rustdoc
|
|
|
|
|
|
miri script: build with stable toolchain
`./miri toolchain` sets up a `rustup override miri`. But then if something goes wrong and the `miri` toolchain doesn't work, one can't even run `./miri toolchain` again as building miri-script needs a toolchain...
So let's always use stable to build miri-script, making it override-independent. I assume everyone will have that installed.
|
|
many-seeds: propagate failure properly
This may help explain https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/3405.
|
