rename ptr::from_exposed_addr -> ptr::with_exposed_provenance
As discussed on [Zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/136281-t-opsem/topic/To.20expose.20or.20not.20to.20expose/near/427757066).
The old name, `from_exposed_addr`, makes little sense as it's not the address that is exposed, it's the provenance. (`ptr.expose_addr()` stays unchanged as we haven't found a better option yet. The intended interpretation is "expose the provenance and return the address".)
The new name nicely matches `ptr::without_provenance`.
CFI: Support non-general coroutines
Previously, we assumed all `ty::Coroutine` were general coroutines and attempted to generalize them through the `Coroutine` trait. Select appropriate traits for each kind of coroutine.
I have this marked as a draft because it currently only fixes async coroutines, and I think it make sense to try to fix gen/async gen coroutines before this is merged.
If the issue [mentioned](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/123106#issuecomment-2030794213) in the original PR is actually affecting someone, we can land this as is to remedy it.
Check that nested statics in thread locals are duplicated per thread.
follow-up to #123310
cc ``@compiler-errors`` ``@RalfJung``
fwiw: I have no idea how thread local statics make that work under LLVM, and miri fails on this example, which I would have expected to be the correct behaviour.
Since the `#[thread_local]` attribute is just an internal implementation detail, I'm just going to start hard erroring on nested mutable statics in thread locals.
Make sure to insert `Sized` bound first into clauses list
#120323 made it so that we don't insert an implicit `Sized` bound whenever we see an *explicit* `Sized` bound. However, since the code that inserts implicit sized bounds puts the bound as the *first* in the list, that means that it had the **side-effect** of possibly meaning we check `Sized` *after* checking other trait bounds.
If those trait bounds result in ambiguity or overflow or something, it may change how we winnow candidates. (**edit: SEE** #123303) This is likely the cause for the regression in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123279#issuecomment-2028899598, since the impl...
```rust
impl<T: Job + Sized> AsJob for T { // <----- changing this to `Sized + Job` or just `Job` (which turns into `Sized + Job`) will FIX the issue.
}
```
...looks incredibly suspicious.
Fixes [after beta-backport] #123279.
Alternative is to revert #120323. I don't have a strong opinion about this, but think it may be nice to keep the diagnostic changes around.
De-LLVM the unchecked shifts [MCP#693]
This is just one part of the MCP (https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/693), but it's the one that IMHO removes the most noise from the standard library code.
Seems net simpler this way, since MIR already supported heterogeneous shifts anyway, and thus it's not more work for backends than before.
r? WaffleLapkin
Add `Ord::cmp` for primitives as a `BinOp` in MIR
Update: most of this OP was written months ago. See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/118310#issuecomment-2016940014 below for where we got to recently that made it ready for review.
---
There are dozens of reasonable ways to implement `Ord::cmp` for integers using comparison, bit-ops, and branches. Those differences are irrelevant at the rust level, however, so we can make things better by adding `BinOp::Cmp` at the MIR level:
1. Exactly how to implement it is left up to the backends, so LLVM can use whatever pattern its optimizer best recognizes and cranelift can use whichever pattern codegens the fastest.
2. By not inlining those details for every use of `cmp`, we drastically reduce the amount of MIR generated for `derive`d `PartialOrd`, while also making it more amenable to MIR-level optimizations.
Having extremely careful `if` ordering to μoptimize resource usage on broadwell (#63767) is great, but it really feels to me like libcore is the wrong place to put that logic. Similarly, using subtraction [tricks](https://graphics.stanford.edu/~seander/bithacks.html#CopyIntegerSign) (#105840) is arguably even nicer, but depends on the optimizer understanding it (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/73417) to be practical. Or maybe [bitor is better than add](https://discourse.llvm.org/t/representing-in-ir/67369/2?u=scottmcm)? But maybe only on a future version that [has `or disjoint` support](https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-add-or-disjoint-flag/75036?u=scottmcm)? And just because one of those forms happens to be good for LLVM, there's no guarantee that it'd be the same form that GCC or Cranelift would rather see -- especially given their very different optimizers. Not to mention that if LLVM gets a spaceship intrinsic -- [which it should](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/Suboptimal.20inlining.20in.20std.20function.20.60binary_search.60/near/404250586) -- we'll need at least a rustc intrinsic to be able to call it.
As for simplifying it in Rust, we now regularly inline `{integer}::partial_cmp`, but it's quite a large amount of IR. The best way to see that is with https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/commit/8811efa88b25b5e41d63850e6047e8257c677858#diff-d134c32d028fbe2bf835fef2df9aca9d13332dd82284ff21ee7ebf717bfa4765R113 -- I added a new pre-codegen MIR test for a simple 3-tuple struct, and this PR change it from 36 locals and 26 basic blocks down to 24 locals and 8 basic blocks. Even better, as soon as the construct-`Some`-then-match-it-in-same-BB noise is cleaned up, this'll expose the `Cmp == 0` branches clearly in MIR, so that an InstCombine (#105808) can simplify that to just a `BinOp::Eq` and thus fix some of our generated code perf issues. (Tracking that through today's `if a < b { Less } else if a == b { Equal } else { Greater }` would be *much* harder.)
---
r? `@ghost`
But first I should check that perf is ok with this
~~...and my true nemesis, tidy.~~
Previously, we assumed all `ty::Coroutine` were general coroutines and
attempted to generalize them through the `Coroutine` trait. Select
appropriate traits for each kind of coroutine.
rustdoc: heavily simplify the synthesis of auto trait impls
`gd --numstat HEAD~2 HEAD src/librustdoc/clean/auto_trait.rs`
**+315 -705** 🟩🟥🟥🟥⬛
---
As outlined in issue #113015, there are currently 3[^1] large separate routines that “clean” `rustc_middle::ty` data types related to generics & predicates to rustdoc data types. Every single one has their own kinds of bugs. While I've patched a lot of bugs in each of the routines in the past, it's about time to unify them. This PR is only the first in a series. It completely **yanks** the custom “bounds cleaning” of mod `auto_trait` and reuses the routines found in mod `simplify`. As alluded to, `simplify` is also flawed but it's still more complete than `auto_trait`'s routines. [See also my review comment over at `tests/rustdoc/synthetic_auto/bounds.rs`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/123340#discussion_r1546900539).
This is preparatory work for rewriting “bounds cleaning” from scratch in follow-up PRs in order to finally [fix] #113015.
Apart from that, I've eliminated all potential sources of *instability* in the rendered output.
See also #119597. I'm pretty sure this fixes#119597.
This PR does not attempt to fix [any other issues related to synthetic auto trait impls](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3AA-synthetic-impls%20label%3AA-auto-traits).
However, it's definitely meant to be a *stepping stone* by making `auto_trait` more contributor-friendly.
---
* Replace `FxHash{Map,Set}` with `FxIndex{Map,Set}` to guarantee a stable iteration order
* Or as a perf opt, `UnordSet` (a thin wrapper around `FxHashSet`) in cases where we never iterate over the set.
* Yes, we do make use of `swap_remove` but that shouldn't matter since all the callers are deterministic. It does make the output less “predictable” but it's still better than before. Ofc, I rely on `rustc_infer` being deterministic. I hope that holds.
* Utilizing `clean::simplify` over the custom “bounds cleaning” routines wipes out the last reference to `collect_referenced_late_bound_regions` in rustdoc (`simplify` uses `bound_vars`) which was a source of instability / unpredictability (cc #116388)
* Remove the types `RegionTarget` and `RegionDeps` from `librustdoc`. They were duplicates of the identical types found in `rustc`. Just import them from `rustc`. For some reason, they were duplicated when splitting `auto_trait` in two in #49711.
* Get rid of the useless “type namespace” `AutoTraitFinder` in `librustdoc`
* The struct only held a `DocContext`, it was over-engineered
* Turn the associated functions into free ones
* Eliminates rightward drift; increases legibility
* `rustc` also contains a useless `AutoTraitFinder` struct but I plan on removing that in a follow-up PR
* Rename a bunch of methods to be way more descriptive
* Eliminate `use super::*;`
* Lead to `clean/mod.rs` accumulating a lot of unnecessary imports
* Made `auto_traits` less modular
* Eliminate a custom `TypeFolder`: We can just use the rustc helper `fold_regions` which does that for us
I plan on adding extensive documentation to `librustdoc`'s `auto_trait` in follow-up PRs.
I don't want to do that in this PR because further refactoring & bug fix PRs may alter the overall structure of `librustdoc`'s & `rustc`'s `auto_trait` modules to a great degree. I'm slowly digging into the dark details of `rustc`'s `auto_trait` module again and once I have the full picture I will be able to provide proper docs.
---
While this PR does indeed touch `rustc`'s `auto_trait` — mostly tiny refactorings — I argue this PR doesn't need any compiler reviewers next to rustdoc ones since that module falls under the purview of rustdoc — it used to be part of `librustdoc` after all (#49711).
Sorry for not having split this into more commits. If you'd like me to I can try to split it into more atomic commits retroactively. However, I don't know if that would actually make reviewing easier. I think the best way to review this might just be to place the master version of `auto_trait` on the left of your screen and the patched one on the right, not joking.
r? `@GuillaumeGomez`
[^1]: Or even 4 depending on the way you're counting.
Update `ParamEnv` docs
There is now a wealth of information in the dev guide about `ParamEnv` so we should explicitly link to it from the doc comments. I also added a caution against using `ParamEnv` and removed the comment about it being "suitable for type checking" as you should practically never use `ParamEnv::empty` for type checking
r? `@compiler-errors`
match lowering: handle or-patterns one layer at a time
`create_or_subcandidates` and `merge_trivial_subcandidates` both call themselves recursively to handle nested or-patterns, which is hard to follow. In this PR I avoid the need for that; we now process a single "layer" of or-patterns at a time.
By calling back into `match_candidates`, we only need to expand one layer at a time. Conversely, since we always try to simplify a layer that we just expanded (thanks to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/123067), we only have to merge one layer at a time.
r? `@matthewjasper`
Don't inherit codegen attrs from parent static
Putting this up partly for discussion and partly for review. Specifically, in #121644, `@oli-obk` designed a system that creates new static items for representing nested allocations in statics. However, in that PR, oli made it so that these statics inherited the codegen attrs from the parent.
This causes problems such as colliding symbols with `#[export_name]` and ICEs with `#[no_mangle]` since these synthetic statics have no `tcx.item_name(..)`.
So the question is, is there any case where we *do* want to inherit codegen attrs from the parent? The only one that seems a bit suspicious is the thread-local attribute. And there may be some interesting interactions with the coverage attributes as well...
Fixes (after backport) #123274. Fixes#123243. cc #121644.
r? `@oli-obk` cc `@nnethercote` `@RalfJung` (reviewers on that pr)
Fix error message for `env!` when env var is not valid Unicode
Currently (without this PR) the `env!` macro emits an ```environment variable `name` not defined at compile time``` error when the environment variable is defined, but not a valid Unicode string. This PR introduces a separate more accurate error message, and a test to verify this behaviour.
For reference, before this PR, the new test would have outputted:
```
error: environment variable `NON_UNICODE_VAR` not defined at compile time
--> non_unicode_env.rs:2:13
|
2 | let _ = env!("NON_UNICODE_VAR");
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
= help: use `std::env::var("NON_UNICODE_VAR")` to read the variable at run time
= note: this error originates in the macro `env` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
error: aborting due to 1 previous error
```
whereas with this PR, the test ouputs:
```
error: environment variable `NON_UNICODE_VAR` is not a valid Unicode string
--> non_unicode_env.rs:2:13
|
2 | let _ = env!("NON_UNICODE_VAR");
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: this error originates in the macro `env` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
error: aborting due to 1 previous error
```
Use the `Align` type when parsing alignment attributes
Use the `Align` type in `rustc_attr::parse_alignment`, removing the need to call `Align::from_bytes(...).unwrap()` later in the compilation process.
pattern analysis: Require enum indices to be contiguous
We had a cfg-hack to allow rust-analyzer to use non-contiguous indices for its enum variants. Unfortunately this no longer works if r-a uses the in-tree version of the crate.
This PR removes the hack, and on the r-a side we'll have to use contiguous indices but that's not too hard.
r? `@compiler-errors`
Stop calling visitors `V`
Renames some visitors which currently have the unhelpful name of `V`. It's not self-documenting, and there is no situation where saving a few bytes in source code helps anyone.
Stacked on top of #123202 due to conflict.
match lowering: sort `Eq` candidates in the failure case too
This is a slight tweak to MIR gen of matches. Take a match like:
```rust
match (s, flag) {
("a", _) if foo() => 1,
("b", true) => 2,
("a", false) => 3,
(_, true) => 4,
_ => 5,
}
```
If we switch on `s == "a"`, the first candidate matches, and we learn almost nothing about the second candidate. So there's a choice:
1. (what we do today) stop sorting candidates, keep the "b" case grouped with everything below. This could allow us to be clever here and test on `flag == true` next.
2. (what this PR does) sort "b" into the failure case. The "b" will be alone (fewer opportunities for picking a good test), but that means the two "a" cases require a single test.
Today, we aren't clever in which tests we pick, so this is an unambiguous win. In a future where we pick tests better, idk. Grouping tests as much as possible feels like a generally good strategy.
This was proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/29623 (9 years ago :D)
CFI: Abstract Closures and Coroutines
This will abstract coroutines in a moment, it's just abstracting closures for now to show `@rcvalle`
This uses the same principal as the methods on traits - figure out the `dyn` type representing the fn trait, instantiate it, and attach that alias set. We're essentially just computing how we would be called in a dynamic context, and attaching that.
Similar to methods on a trait object, the most common way to indirectly
call a closure or coroutine is through the vtable on the appropriate
trait. This uses the same approach as we use for trait methods, after
backing out the trait arguments from the type.
Add support for `NonNull`s in the `ambiguous_wide_ptr_comparisions` lint
This PR add support for `NonNull` pointers in the `ambiguous_wide_ptr_comparisions` lint.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/121264
r? `@Nadrieril` (since you just reviewed #121268, feel free to reassign)
KCFI: Require -C panic=abort
While the KCFI scheme is not incompatible with unwinding, LLVM's `invoke` instruction does not currently support KCFI bundles. While it likely will in the near future, we won't be able to assume that in Rust for a while.
We encountered this problem while [turning on closure support](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/123106#issuecomment-2027436640).
r? ``@workingjubilee``
Jacob Pratt