Remove `GenKillAnalysis`
There are two kinds of dataflow analysis in the compiler: `Analysis`, which is the basic kind, and `GenKillAnalysis`, which is a more specialized kind for gen/kill analyses that is intended as an optimization. However, it turns out that `GenKillAnalysis` is actually a pessimization! It's faster (and much simpler) to do all the gen/kill analyses via `Analysis`. This lets us remove `GenKillAnalysis`, and `GenKillSet`, and a few other things, and also merge `AnalysisDomain` into `Analysis`. The PR removes 500 lines of code and improves performance.
r? `@tmiasko`
Some float methods are now `const fn` under the `const_float_methods` feature gate.
In order to support `min`, `max`, `abs` and `copysign`, the implementation of some intrinsics had to be moved from Miri to rustc_const_eval.
fix/update teach_note from 'escaping mutable ref/ptr' const-check
The old note was quite confusing since it talked about statics, but the message is also shown for consts. So let's reword to something that is true for both of them.
Don't use Immediate::offset to transmute pointers to integers
This applies the relatively new `assert_matches_abi` check in the `offset` operation on immediates, which makes sure that if offsets are used to alter the layout (which is possible because the field layout is arbitrarily picked by the caller), this is not done in a way that breaks the invariant of the `Immediate` type.
This leads to ICEs in a GVN mir-opt test, so the second commit fixes GVN.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131064.
- fix for divergence
- fix error message
- fix another cranelift test
- fix some cranelift things
- don't set the NORETURN option for naked asm
- fix use of naked_asm! in doc comment
- fix use of naked_asm! in run-make test
- use `span_bug` in unreachable branch
interpret: always enable write_immediate sanity checks
Writing a wrongly-sized scalar somewhere can have quite confusing effects. Let's see how expensive it is to catch this early.
Check vtable projections for validity in miri
Currently, miri does not catch when we transmute `dyn Trait<Assoc = A>` to `dyn Trait<Assoc = B>`. This PR implements such a check, and fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/3905.
To do this, we modify `GlobalAlloc::VTable` to contain the *whole* list of `PolyExistentialPredicate`, and then modify `check_vtable_for_type` to validate the `PolyExistentialProjection`s of the vtable, along with the principal trait that was already being validated.
cc ``@RalfJung``
r? ``@lcnr`` or types
I also tweaked the diagnostics a bit.
---
**Open question:** We don't validate the auto traits. You can transmute `dyn Foo` into `dyn Foo + Send`. Should we check that? We currently have a test that *exercises* this as not being UB:
6c6d210089/src/tools/miri/tests/pass/dyn-upcast.rs (L14-L20)
I'm not actually sure if we ever decided that's actually UB or not 🤔
We could perhaps still check that the underlying type of the object (i.e. the concrete type that was unsized) implements the auto traits, to catch UB like:
```rust
fn main() {
let x: &dyn Trait = &std::ptr::null_mut::<()>();
let _: &(dyn Trait + Send) = std::mem::transmute(x);
//~^ this vtable is not allocated for a type that is `Send`!
}
```
interpret: remove outdated FIXME
The rule about `repr(C)` types with compatible fields got removed from the ABI compat docs before they landed, so this FIXME here is no longer correct. (So this is basically a follow-up to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/130185, doing some more cleanup around deciding not to guarantee ABI compatibility for structurally compatible `repr(C)` types.)
fix rustc_nonnull_optimization_guaranteed docs
As far as I can tell, even back when this was [added](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/60300) it never *enabled* any optimizations. It just indicates that the FFI compat lint should accept those types for NPO.
Prevent Deduplication of `LongRunningWarn`
Fixes#118612
As mention in the issue, `LongRunningWarn` is meant to be repeated multiple times.
Therefore, this PR stores a unique number in every instance of `LongRunningWarn` so that it's not hashed into the same value and omitted by the deduplication mechanism.
interpret, miri: fix dealing with overflow during slice indexing and allocation
This is mostly to fix https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/130284.
I then realized we're using somewhat sketchy arguments for a similar multiplication in `copy`/`copy_nonoverlapping`/`write_bytes`, so I made them all share the same function that checks exactly the right thing. (The intrinsics would previously fail on allocations larger than `1 << 47` bytes... which are theoretically possible maybe? Anyway it seems conceptually wrong to use any other bound than `isize::MAX` here.)
miri: treat non-memory local variables properly for data race detection
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/3242
Miri has an optimization where some local variables are not represented in memory until something forces them to be stored in memory (most notably, creating a pointer/reference to the local will do that). However, for a subsystem triggering on memory accesses -- such as the data race detector -- this means that the memory access seems to happen only when the local is moved to memory, instead of at the time that it actually happens. This can lead to UB reports in programs that do not actually have UB.
This PR fixes that by adding machine hooks for reads and writes to such efficiently represented local variables. The data race system tracks those very similar to how it would track reads and writes to addressable memory, and when a local is moved to memory, the clocks get overwritten with the information stored for the local.
Rollup of 5 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #129195 (Stabilize `&mut` (and `*mut`) as well as `&Cell` (and `*const Cell`) in const)
- #130118 (move Option::unwrap_unchecked into const_option feature gate)
- #130295 (Fix target-cpu fpu features on Armv8-R.)
- #130371 (Correctly account for niche-optimized tags in rustc_transmute)
- #130381 (library: Compute Rust exception class from its string repr)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
const-eval interning: accept interior mutable pointers in final value
…but keep rejecting mutable references
This fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/121610 by no longer firing the lint when there is a pointer with interior mutability in the final value of the constant. On stable, such pointers can be created with code like:
```rust
pub enum JsValue {
Undefined,
Object(Cell<bool>),
}
impl Drop for JsValue {
fn drop(&mut self) {}
}
// This does *not* get promoted since `JsValue` has a destructor.
// However, the outer scope rule applies, still giving this 'static lifetime.
const UNDEFINED: &JsValue = &JsValue::Undefined;
```
It's not great to accept such values since people *might* think that it is legal to mutate them with unsafe code. (This is related to how "infectious" `UnsafeCell` is, which is a [wide open question](https://github.com/rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/236).) However, we [explicitly document](https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/behavior-considered-undefined.html) that things created by `const` are immutable. Furthermore, we also accept the following even more questionable code without any lint today:
```rust
let x: &'static Option<Cell<i32>> = &None;
```
This is even more questionable since it does *not* involve a `const`, and yet still puts the data into immutable memory. We could view this as promotion [potentially introducing UB](https://github.com/rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/493). However, we've accepted this since ~forever and it's [too late to reject this now](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/122789); the pattern is just too useful.
So basically, if you think that `UnsafeCell` should be tracked fully precisely, then you should want the lint we currently emit to be removed, which this PR does. If you think `UnsafeCell` should "infect" surrounding `enum`s, the big problem is really https://github.com/rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/493 which does not trigger the lint -- the cases the lint triggers on are actually the "harmless" ones as there is an explicit surrounding `const` explaining why things end up being immutable.
What all this goes to show is that the hard error added in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/118324 (later turned into the future-compat lint that I am now suggesting we remove) was based on some wrong assumptions, at least insofar as it concerns shared references. Furthermore, that lint does not help at all for the most problematic case here where the potential UB is completely implicit. (In fact, the lint is actively in the way of [my preferred long-term strategy](https://github.com/rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/493#issuecomment-2028674105) for dealing with this UB.) So I think we should go back to square one and remove that error/lint for shared references. For mutable references, it does seem to work as intended, so we can keep it. Here it serves as a safety net in case the static checks that try to contain mutable references to the inside of a const initializer are not working as intended; I therefore made the check ICE to encourage users to tell us if that safety net is triggered.
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/122153 by removing the lint.
Cc `@rust-lang/opsem` `@rust-lang/lang`
