Rollup merge of #122461 - the8472:fix-step-forward-unchecked, r=Amanieu
fix unsoundness in Step::forward_unchecked for signed integers Fixes #122420 ```rust pub fn foo(a: i8, b: u8) -> i8 { unsafe { a.checked_add_unsigned(b).unwrap_unchecked() } } ``` still compiles down to a single arithmetic instruction ([godbolt](https://rust.godbolt.org/z/qsd3xYWfE)). But we may be losing some loop optimizations if llvm can no longer easily derive that it's a finite counted loop from the no-wrapping flags.
This commit is contained in:
commit
75dc99b996
@ -183,8 +183,25 @@ unsafe fn backward_unchecked(start: Self, count: usize) -> Self {
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// These are still macro-generated because the integer literals resolve to different types.
|
||||
macro_rules! step_identical_methods {
|
||||
// Separate impls for signed ranges because the distance within a signed range can be larger
|
||||
// than the signed::MAX value. Therefore `as` casting to the signed type would be incorrect.
|
||||
macro_rules! step_signed_methods {
|
||||
($unsigned: ty) => {
|
||||
#[inline]
|
||||
unsafe fn forward_unchecked(start: Self, n: usize) -> Self {
|
||||
// SAFETY: the caller has to guarantee that `start + n` doesn't overflow.
|
||||
unsafe { start.checked_add_unsigned(n as $unsigned).unwrap_unchecked() }
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#[inline]
|
||||
unsafe fn backward_unchecked(start: Self, n: usize) -> Self {
|
||||
// SAFETY: the caller has to guarantee that `start - n` doesn't overflow.
|
||||
unsafe { start.checked_sub_unsigned(n as $unsigned).unwrap_unchecked() }
|
||||
}
|
||||
};
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
macro_rules! step_unsigned_methods {
|
||||
() => {
|
||||
#[inline]
|
||||
unsafe fn forward_unchecked(start: Self, n: usize) -> Self {
|
||||
@ -197,7 +214,12 @@ unsafe fn backward_unchecked(start: Self, n: usize) -> Self {
|
||||
// SAFETY: the caller has to guarantee that `start - n` doesn't overflow.
|
||||
unsafe { start.unchecked_sub(n as Self) }
|
||||
}
|
||||
};
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// These are still macro-generated because the integer literals resolve to different types.
|
||||
macro_rules! step_identical_methods {
|
||||
() => {
|
||||
#[inline]
|
||||
#[allow(arithmetic_overflow)]
|
||||
#[rustc_inherit_overflow_checks]
|
||||
@ -238,6 +260,7 @@ macro_rules! step_integer_impls {
|
||||
#[unstable(feature = "step_trait", reason = "recently redesigned", issue = "42168")]
|
||||
impl Step for $u_narrower {
|
||||
step_identical_methods!();
|
||||
step_unsigned_methods!();
|
||||
|
||||
#[inline]
|
||||
fn steps_between(start: &Self, end: &Self) -> Option<usize> {
|
||||
@ -270,6 +293,7 @@ fn backward_checked(start: Self, n: usize) -> Option<Self> {
|
||||
#[unstable(feature = "step_trait", reason = "recently redesigned", issue = "42168")]
|
||||
impl Step for $i_narrower {
|
||||
step_identical_methods!();
|
||||
step_signed_methods!($u_narrower);
|
||||
|
||||
#[inline]
|
||||
fn steps_between(start: &Self, end: &Self) -> Option<usize> {
|
||||
@ -334,6 +358,7 @@ fn backward_checked(start: Self, n: usize) -> Option<Self> {
|
||||
#[unstable(feature = "step_trait", reason = "recently redesigned", issue = "42168")]
|
||||
impl Step for $u_wider {
|
||||
step_identical_methods!();
|
||||
step_unsigned_methods!();
|
||||
|
||||
#[inline]
|
||||
fn steps_between(start: &Self, end: &Self) -> Option<usize> {
|
||||
@ -359,6 +384,7 @@ fn backward_checked(start: Self, n: usize) -> Option<Self> {
|
||||
#[unstable(feature = "step_trait", reason = "recently redesigned", issue = "42168")]
|
||||
impl Step for $i_wider {
|
||||
step_identical_methods!();
|
||||
step_signed_methods!($u_wider);
|
||||
|
||||
#[inline]
|
||||
fn steps_between(start: &Self, end: &Self) -> Option<usize> {
|
||||
|
@ -325,6 +325,11 @@ fn test_range_advance_by() {
|
||||
assert_eq!(Ok(()), r.advance_back_by(usize::MAX));
|
||||
|
||||
assert_eq!((r.start, r.end), (0u128 + usize::MAX as u128, u128::MAX - usize::MAX as u128));
|
||||
|
||||
// issue 122420, Step::forward_unchecked was unsound for signed integers
|
||||
let mut r = -128i8..127;
|
||||
assert_eq!(Ok(()), r.advance_by(200));
|
||||
assert_eq!(r.next(), Some(72));
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#[test]
|
||||
|
@ -1 +1 @@
|
||||
The loop took around 7s
|
||||
The loop took around 12s
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user