Don't ICE in `might_permit_raw_init` if reference is polymorphic
Emitting optimized MIR for a polymorphic function may require computing layout of a type that isn't (yet) known. This happens in the instcombine pass, for example. Let's fail gracefully in that condition.
cc `@saethlin`
fixes#107999
Handle discriminant in DataflowConstProp
cc ``@jachris``
r? ``@JakobDegen``
This PR attempts to extend the DataflowConstProp pass to handle propagation of discriminants. We handle this by adding 2 new variants to `TrackElem`: `TrackElem::Variant` for enum variants and `TrackElem::Discriminant` for the enum discriminant pseudo-place.
The difficulty is that the enum discriminant and enum variants may alias each another. This is the issue of the `Option<NonZeroUsize>` test, which is the equivalent of https://github.com/rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/84 with a direct write.
To handle that, we generalize the flood process to flood all the potentially aliasing places. In particular:
- any write to `(PLACE as Variant)`, either direct or through a projection, floods `(PLACE as OtherVariant)` for all other variants and `discriminant(PLACE)`;
- `SetDiscriminant(PLACE)` floods `(PLACE as Variant)` for each variant.
This implies that flooding is not hierarchical any more, and that an assignment to a non-tracked place may need to flood a tracked place. This is handled by `for_each_aliasing_place` which generalizes `preorder_invoke`.
As we deaggregate enums by putting `SetDiscriminant` last, this allows to propagate the value of the discriminant.
This refactor will allow to make https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/107009 able to handle discriminants too.
Clearly document intentional UB in mir-opt tests
All of the changed mir-opt test input files did not pass Miri. Now they do.
r? `@cjgillot` because there's a CopyProp test in here that I do not fully understand
Mir-Opt for copying enums with large discrepancies
I have been meaning to make this for quite a while, based off of this [hackmd](https://hackmd.io/`@ft4bxUsFT5CEUBmRKYHr7w/rJM8BBPzD).`
I'm not sure where to put this opt now that I've made it, so I'd appreciate suggestions on that!
It's also one long chain of statements, not sure if there's a more friendly format to make it.
r? `@tmiasko`
I would `r` oli but he's on leave so he suggested I `r` tmiasko or wesleywiser.
Turn projections into copies in CopyProp.
The current implementation can leave behind projections that are moved out several times.
This PR widens the check to turn such moves into copies: a move out of a projection of a copy is equivalent to a copy of the original projection.
There is a distinction between running this on wasm and i686, even though they should be
identical. This technically is not _incorrect_, it's just an unexpected difference, which is
worth investigating, but not for correctness.
Remove both StorageLive and StorageDead in CopyProp.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/107511https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/106908 removed StorageDead without the accompanying StorageLive. In loops, execution would see repeated StorageLive, without any StorageDead, which is UB.
So when removing storage statements, we have to remove both StorageLive and StorageDead.
~I also added a MIR validation pass for StorageLive. It may be a bit overzealous.~
Implement simple CopyPropagation based on SSA analysis
This PR extracts the "copy propagation" logic from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/106285.
MIR may produce chains of assignment between locals, like `_x = move? _y`.
This PR attempts to remove such chains by unifying locals.
The current implementation is a bit overzealous in turning moves into copies, and in removing storage statements.
