In general it is not correct to inline a callee with a target features
that are subset of the callee. Require target features to match exactly
during inlining.
The exact match could be potentially relaxed, but this would require
identifying specific feature that are allowed to differ, those that need
to match, and those that can be present in caller but not in callee.
This resolves MIR part of #116573. For other concerns with respect to
the previous implementation also see areInlineCompatible in LLVM.
It makes it sound like the `ExprKind` and `Rvalue` are supposed to represent all pointer related
casts, when in reality their just used to share a some enum variants. Make it clear there these
are only coercion to make it clear why only some pointer related "casts" are in the enum.
[libs] Simplify `unchecked_{shl,shr}`
There's no need for the `const_eval_select` dance here. And while I originally wrote the `.try_into().unwrap_unchecked()` implementation here, it's kinda a mess in MIR -- this new one is substantially simpler, as shown by the old one being above the inlining threshold but the new one being below it in the `mir-opt/inline/unchecked_shifts` tests.
We don't need `u32::checked_shl` doing a dance through both `Result` *and* `Option` 🙃
Remove `box_free` lang item
This PR removes the `box_free` lang item, replacing it with `Box`'s `Drop` impl. Box dropping is still slightly magic because the contained value is still dropped by the compiler.
There's no need for the `const_eval_select` dance here. And while I originally wrote the `.try_into().unwrap_unchecked()` implementation here, it's kinda a mess in MIR -- this new one is substantially simpler, as shown by the old one being above the inlining threshold but the new one being below it.
To reproduce the changes in this commit locally:
- Run `./x test tidy` and remove all the output files not associated
with a test file anymore, as reported by tidy.
- Run `./x test tests/mir-opt --bless` to generate the new outputs.
MIR: opt-in normalization of `BasicBlock` and `Local` numbering
This doesn't matter at all for actual codegen, but after spending some time reading pre-codegen MIR, I was wishing I didn't have to jump around so much in reading post-inlining code.
So this add two passes that are off by default for every mir level, but can be enabled (`-Zmir-enable-passes=+ReorderBasicBlocks,+ReorderLocals`) for humans.
Since this only affects `PreCodegen MIR, and it would be nice for that to be resilient to permutations of things that don't affect the actual semantic behaviours.
Remove the size of locals heuristic in MIR inlining
This heuristic doesn't necessarily correlate to complexity of the MIR Body. In particular, a lot of straight-line code in MIR tends to never reuse a local, even though any optimizer would effectively reuse the storage or just put everything in registers. So it doesn't even necessarily make sense that this would be a stack size heuristic.
So... what happens if we just delete the heuristic? The benchmark suite improves significantly. Less heuristics better?
r? `@cjgillot`
Insert alignment checks for pointer dereferences when debug assertions are enabled
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/54915
- [x] Jake tells me this sounds like a place to use `MirPatch`, but I can't figure out how to insert a new basic block with a new terminator in the middle of an existing basic block, using `MirPatch`. (if nobody else backs up this point I'm checking this as "not actually a good idea" because the code looks pretty clean to me after rearranging it a bit)
- [x] Using `CastKind::PointerExposeAddress` is definitely wrong, we don't want to expose. Calling a function to get the pointer address seems quite excessive. ~I'll see if I can add a new `CastKind`.~ `CastKind::Transmute` to the rescue!
- [x] Implement a more helpful panic message like slice bounds checking.
r? `@oli-obk`
Stabilize `#![feature(target_feature_11)]`
## Stabilization report
### Summary
Allows for safe functions to be marked with `#[target_feature]` attributes.
Functions marked with `#[target_feature]` are generally considered as unsafe functions: they are unsafe to call, cannot be assigned to safe function pointers, and don't implement the `Fn*` traits.
However, calling them from other `#[target_feature]` functions with a superset of features is safe.
```rust
// Demonstration function
#[target_feature(enable = "avx2")]
fn avx2() {}
fn foo() {
// Calling `avx2` here is unsafe, as we must ensure
// that AVX is available first.
unsafe {
avx2();
}
}
#[target_feature(enable = "avx2")]
fn bar() {
// Calling `avx2` here is safe.
avx2();
}
```
### Test cases
Tests for this feature can be found in [`src/test/ui/rfcs/rfc-2396-target_feature-11/`](b67ba9ba20/src/test/ui/rfcs/rfc-2396-target_feature-11/).
### Edge cases
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/73631
Closures defined inside functions marked with `#[target_feature]` inherit the target features of their parent function. They can still be assigned to safe function pointers and implement the appropriate `Fn*` traits.
```rust
#[target_feature(enable = "avx2")]
fn qux() {
let my_closure = || avx2(); // this call to `avx2` is safe
let f: fn() = my_closure;
}
```
This means that in order to call a function with `#[target_feature]`, you must show that the target-feature is available while the function executes *and* for as long as whatever may escape from that function lives.
### Documentation
- Reference: https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/pull/1181
---
cc tracking issue #69098
r? `@ghost`
