coverage: Remove `pending_dups` from the span refiner
When extracting coverage spans from a function's MIR, we need to decide how to handle spans that are associated with more than one node (BCB) in the coverage control flow graph.
The existing code for managing those duplicate spans is very subtle and difficult to modify. But by eagerly deduplicating those extracted spans in a much simpler way, we can remove a massive chunk of complexity from the span refiner.
There is a tradeoff here, in that we no longer try to retain *all* nondominating BCBs that have the same span, only the last one in the (semi-arbitrary) dominance ordering. But in practice, this produces very little difference in our coverage tests, and the simplification is so significant that I think it's worthwhile.
``@rustbot`` label +A-code-coverage
I have a suspicion that quite a few delayed bug paths are impossible to
reach, so I did an experiment.
I converted every `delayed_bug` to a `bug`, ran the full test suite,
then converted back every `bug` that was hit. A surprising number were
never hit.
The next commit will convert some more back, based on human judgment.
Rename `ConstPropLint` to `KnownPanicsLint`
`OverflowLint` is a clearer name because it communicates what the lint does instead of the underlying mechanism it uses (const propagation) which should be of secondary concern.
`OverflowLint` isn't the most accurate name because the lint looks for other errors as well such as division by zero not just overflows, but I couldn't think of another equally succinct name.
As a part of this change. I've also added/updated some of the comments.
cc ```@RalfJung``` ```@oli-obk``` for visibility in case you go looking for the lint using the old name.
Edit:
Changed the name from `OverflowLint` to `KnownPanicsLint`
Overhaul `Diagnostic` and `DiagnosticBuilder`
Implements the first part of https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/722, which moves functionality and use away from `Diagnostic`, onto `DiagnosticBuilder`.
Likely follow-ups:
- Move things around, because this PR was written to minimize diff size, so some things end up in sub-optimal places. E.g. `DiagnosticBuilder` has impls in both `diagnostic.rs` and `diagnostic_builder.rs`.
- Rename `Diagnostic` as `DiagInner` and `DiagnosticBuilder` as `Diag`.
r? `@davidtwco`
Currently many diagnostic modifier methods are available on both
`Diagnostic` and `DiagnosticBuilder`. This commit removes most of them
from `Diagnostic`. To minimize the diff size, it keeps them within
`diagnostic.rs` but changes the surrounding `impl Diagnostic` block to
`impl DiagnosticBuilder`. (I intend to move things around later, to give
a more sensible code layout.)
`Diagnostic` keeps a few methods that it still needs, like `sub`,
`arg`, and `replace_args`.
The `forward!` macro, which defined two additional methods per call
(e.g. `note` and `with_note`), is replaced by the `with_fn!` macro,
which defines one additional method per call (e.g. `with_note`). It's
now also only used when necessary -- not all modifier methods currently
need a `with_*` form. (New ones can be easily added as necessary.)
All this also requires changing `trait AddToDiagnostic` so its methods
take `DiagnosticBuilder` instead of `Diagnostic`, which leads to many
mechanical changes. `SubdiagnosticMessageOp` gains a type parameter `G`.
There are three subdiagnostics -- `DelayedAtWithoutNewline`,
`DelayedAtWithNewline`, and `InvalidFlushedDelayedDiagnosticLevel` --
that are created within the diagnostics machinery and appended to
external diagnostics. These are handled at the `Diagnostic` level, which
means it's now hard to construct them via `derive(Diagnostic)`, so
instead we construct them by hand. This has no effect on what they look
like when printed.
There are lots of new `allow` markers for `untranslatable_diagnostics`
and `diagnostics_outside_of_impl`. This is because
`#[rustc_lint_diagnostics]` annotations were present on the `Diagnostic`
modifier methods, but missing from the `DiagnosticBuilder` modifier
methods. They're now present.
errors: only eagerly translate subdiagnostics
Subdiagnostics don't need to be lazily translated, they can always be eagerly translated. Eager translation is slightly more complex as we need to have a `DiagCtxt` available to perform the translation, which involves slightly more threading of that context.
This slight increase in complexity should enable later simplifications - like passing `DiagCtxt` into `AddToDiagnostic` and moving Fluent messages into the diagnostic structs rather than having them in separate files (working on that was what led to this change).
r? ```@nnethercote```
coverage: Discard spans that fill the entire function body
While debugging some other coverage changes, I discovered a frustrating inconsistency that occurs in functions containing closures, if they end with an implicit `()` return instead of an explicit trailing-expression.
This turns out to have been caused by the corresponding node in MIR having a span that covers the entire function body. When preparing coverage spans, any span that fills the whole body tends to cause more harm than good, so this PR detects and discards those spans.
(This isn't the first time whole-body spans have caused problems; we also eliminated some of them in #118525.)
This fixes the issue wherein the lint didn't fire for promoteds
in the case of SHL/SHR operators in non-optimized builds
and all arithmetic operators in optimized builds
Implement intrinsics with fallback bodies
fixes#93145 (though we can port many more intrinsics)
cc #63585
The way this works is that the backend logic for generating custom code for intrinsics has been made fallible. The only failure path is "this intrinsic is unknown". The `Instance` (that was `InstanceDef::Intrinsic`) then gets converted to `InstanceDef::Item`, which represents the fallback body. A regular function call to that body is then codegenned. This is currently implemented for
* codegen_ssa (so llvm and gcc)
* codegen_cranelift
other backends will need to adjust, but they can just keep doing what they were doing if they prefer (though adding new intrinsics to the compiler will then require them to implement them, instead of getting the fallback body).
cc `@scottmcm` `@WaffleLapkin`
### todo
* [ ] miri support
* [x] default intrinsic name to name of function instead of requiring it to be specified in attribute
* [x] make sure that the bodies are always available (must be collected for metadata)
When we try to extract coverage-relevant spans from MIR, sometimes we see MIR
statements/terminators whose spans cover the entire function body. Those spans
tend to be unhelpful for coverage purposes, because they often represent
compiler-inserted code, e.g. the implicit return value of `()`.
Subdiagnostics don't need to be lazily translated, they can always be
eagerly translated. Eager translation is slightly more complex as we need
to have a `DiagCtxt` available to perform the translation, which involves
slightly more threading of that context.
This slight increase in complexity should enable later simplifications -
like passing `DiagCtxt` into `AddToDiagnostic` and moving Fluent messages
into the diagnostic structs rather than having them in separate files
(working on that was what led to this change).
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david@davidtw.co>
Store static initializers in metadata instead of the MIR of statics.
This means that adding generic statics would be even more difficult, as we can't evaluate statics from other crates anymore, but the subtle issue I have encountered make me think that having this be an explicit problem is better.
The issue is that
```rust
static mut FOO: &mut u32 = &mut 42;
static mut BAR = unsafe { FOO };
```
gets different allocations, instead of referring to the same one. This is also true for non-static mut, but promotion makes `static FOO: &u32 = &42;` annoying to demo.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/61345
## Why is this being done?
In order to ensure all crates see the same nested allocations (which is the last issue that needs fixing before we can stabilize [`const_mut_refs`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/57349)), I am working on creating anonymous (from the Rust side, to LLVM it's like a regular static item) static items for the nested allocations in a static. If we evaluate the static item in a downstream crate again, we will end up duplicating its nested allocations (and in some cases, like the `match` case, even duplicate the main allocation).
Use fewer delayed bugs.
For some cases where it's clear that an error has already occurred, e.g.:
- there's a comment stating exactly that, or
- things like HIR lowering, where we are lowering an error kind
The commit also tweaks some comments around delayed bug sites.
r? `@oli-obk`
For some cases where it's clear that an error has already occurred,
e.g.:
- there's a comment stating exactly that, or
- things like HIR lowering, where we are lowering an error kind
The commit also tweaks some comments around delayed bug sites.
If we only check for duplicate spans when `prev` is unmodified, we reduce the
number of situations that `update_pending_dups` needs to handle.
This could potentially change the coverage spans we produce in some unknown
corner cases, but none of our current coverage tests indicate any change.
Dejargonize `subst`
In favor of #110793, replace almost every occurence of `subst` and `substitution` from rustc codes, but they still remains in subtrees under `src/tools/` like clippy and test codes (I'd like to replace them after this)
Fix async closures in CTFE
First commit renames `is_coroutine_or_closure` into `is_closure_like`, because `is_coroutine_or_closure_or_coroutine_closure` seems confusing and long.
Second commit fixes some forgotten cases where we want to handle `TyKind::CoroutineClosure` the same as closures and coroutines.
The test exercises the change to `ValidityVisitor::aggregate_field_path_elem` which is the source of #120946, but not the change to `UsedParamsNeedSubstVisitor`, though I feel like it's not that big of a deal. Let me know if you'd like for me to look into constructing a test for the latter, though I have no idea what it'd look like (we can't assert against `TooGeneric` anywhere?).
Fixes#120946
r? oli-obk cc ``@RalfJung``
Check that the ABI of the instance we are inlining is correct
When computing the `CallSite` in the mir inliner, double check that the instance of the function that we are inlining is compatible with the signature from the trait definition that we acquire from the MIR.
Fixes#120940
r? ``@oli-obk`` or ``@cjgillot``
Remove a bunch of dead parameters in functions
Found this kind of issue when working on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/119650
I wrote a trivial toy lint and manual review to find these.
Assert that params with the same *index* have the same *name*
Found this bug when trying to build libcore with the new solver, since it will canonicalize two params with the same index into *different* placeholders if those params differ by name.
Fold pointer operations in GVN
This PR proposes 2 combinations of cast operations in MIR GVN:
- a chain of `PtrToPtr` or `MutToConstPointer` casts can be folded together into a single `PtrToPtr` cast;
- we attempt to evaluate more ptr ops when there is no provenance.
In particular, this allows to read from static slices.
This is not yet sufficient to see through slice operations that use `PtrComponents` (because that's a union), but still a step forward.
r? `@ghost`
These crates all needed specialization for `newtype_index!`, which will no
longer be necessary when the current nightly eventually becomes the next
bootstrap compiler.
