Add `SingleUseConsts` mir-opt pass
The goal here is to make a pass that can be run in debug builds to simplify the common case of constants that are used just once -- that doesn't need SSA handling and avoids any potential downside of multi-use constants. In particular, to simplify the `if T::IS_ZST` pattern that's common in the standard library.
By also handling the case of constants that are *never* actually used this fully replaces the `ConstDebugInfo` pass, since it has all the information needed to do that naturally from the traversal it needs to do anyway.
This is roughly a wash on instructions on its own (a couple regressions, a few improvements https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/125910#issuecomment-2144963361), with a bunch of size improvements. So I'd like to land it as its own PR, then do follow-ups to take more advantage of it (in the inliner, cg_ssa, etc).
r? `@saethlin`
Add explanatory note to async block type mismatch error
The async block type mismatch error might leave the user wondering as to why it occurred. The new note should give them the needed context.
Changes this diagnostic:
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> src/main.rs:5:23
|
2 | let a = async { 1 };
| ----------- the expected `async` block
3 | let b = async { 2 };
| ----------- the found `async` block
4 |
5 | let bad = vec![a, b];
| ^ expected `async` block, found a different `async` block
|
= note: expected `async` block `{async block@src/main.rs:2:13: 2:24}`
found `async` block `{async block@src/main.rs:3:13: 3:24}`
```
to this:
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> src/main.rs:5:23
|
2 | let a = async { 1 };
| ----------- the expected `async` block
3 | let b = async { 2 };
| ----------- the found `async` block
4 |
5 | let bad = vec![a, b];
| ^ expected `async` block, found a different `async` block
|
= note: expected `async` block `{async block@src/main.rs:2:13: 2:24}`
found `async` block `{async block@src/main.rs:3:13: 3:24}`
= note: no two async blocks, even if identical, have the same type
= help: consider pinning your async block and and casting it to a trait object
```
Fixes#125737
Fix ICE due to `unwrap` in `probe_for_name_many`
Fixes#125876
Now `probe_for_name_many` bubbles up the error returned by `probe_op` instead of calling `unwrap` on it.
Enable GVN for `AggregateKind::RawPtr`
Looks like I was worried for nothing; this seems like it's much easier than I was originally thinking it would be.
r? `@cjgillot`
This should be useful for `x[..4]`-like things, should those start inlining enough to expose the lengths.
simd packed types: remove outdated comment, extend codegen test
It seems like https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/125311 made that check in codegen unnecessary?
r? `@workingjubilee` `@calebzulawski`
offset_of: allow (unstably) taking the offset of slice tail fields
Fields of type `[T]` have a statically known offset, so there is no reason to forbid them in `offset_of!`. This PR adds the `offset_of_slice` feature to allow them.
I created a tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/126151.
mark binding undetermined if target name exist and not obtained
- Fixes#124490
- Fixes#125013
Following up on #124840, I think handling only `target_bindings` is sufficient.
r? `@petrochenkov`
Revert "Use the HIR instead of mir_keys for determining whether something will have a MIR body."
This reverts commit e5cba17b84.
turns out SMIR still needs it (https://github.com/model-checking/kani/issues/3218). I'll create a full plan and MCP for what I intended this to be a part of. Maybe my plan is nonsense anyway.
Detect pub structs never constructed and unused associated constants
<!--
If this PR is related to an unstable feature or an otherwise tracked effort,
please link to the relevant tracking issue here. If you don't know of a related
tracking issue or there are none, feel free to ignore this.
This PR will get automatically assigned to a reviewer. In case you would like
a specific user to review your work, you can assign it to them by using
r? <reviewer name>
-->
Lints never constructed public structs.
If we don't provide public methods to construct public structs with private fields, and don't construct them in the local crate. They would be never constructed. So that we can detect such public structs.
---
Update:
Also lints unused associated constants in traits.
Parse unsafe attributes
Initial parse implementation for #123757
This is the initial work to parse unsafe attributes, which is represented as an extra `unsafety` field in `MetaItem` and `AttrItem`. There's two areas in the code where it appears that parsing is done manually and not using the parser stuff, and I'm not sure how I'm supposed to thread the change there.
Revert: create const block bodies in typeck via query feeding
as per the discussion in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/125806#discussion_r1622563948
It was a mistake to try to shoehorn const blocks and some specific anon consts into the same box and feed them during typeck. It turned out not simplifying anything (my hope was that we could feed `type_of` to start avoiding the huge HIR matcher, but that didn't work out), but instead making a few things more fragile.
reverts the const-block-specific parts of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/124650
`@bors` rollup=never had a small perf impact previously
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/125846
r? `@compiler-errors`
Revert "Disallow ambiguous attributes on expressions" on nightly
As discussed in [today's t-compiler meeting](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/238009-t-compiler.2Fmeetings/topic/.5Bweekly.5D.202024-06-06/near/443079505), this reverts PR #124099 to fix P-critical beta regressions #125199.
r? ``@wesleywiser``
Opening as draft so that ``@wesleywiser`` and ``@apiraino,`` you can tell me whether you wanted:
1. a `beta-accepted` revert of #124099 on nightly (this PR)? That will need to be backported to beta (even though #126093 may be the last of those)
2. a revert of #124099 on beta?
3. all of the above?
I also opened #126102, another draft PR to revert #124099 on beta, should you choose options 2 or 3.
Don't warn on fields in the `unreachable_pub` lint
This PR restrict the `unreachable_pub` lint by not linting on `pub` fields of `pub(restricted)` structs and unions. This is done because that can quickly clutter the code for an uncertain value, in particular since the "real" visibility is defined by the parent (the struct it-self).
This is meant to address one of the last concern of the `unreachable_pub` lint.
r? ``@petrochenkov``
