Update panic docs to make it clearer when to use panic vs Result
This is based on a question that came up in one of my [error handling office hours](https://twitter.com/yaahc_/status/1506376624509374467?s=20&t=Sp-cEjrx5kpMdNsAGPOo9w) meetings. I had a user who was fairly familiar with error type design, thiserror and anyhow, and rust in general, but who was still confused about when to use panics vs when to use Result and `Error`.
This will also be cross referenced in an error handling FAQ that I will be creating in the https://github.com/rust-lang/project-error-handling repo shortly.
explicitly distinguish pointer::addr and pointer::expose_addr
``@bgeron`` pointed out that the current docs promise that `ptr.addr()` and `ptr as usize` are equivalent. I don't think that is a promise we want to make. (Conceptually, `ptr as usize` might 'escape' the provenance to enable future `usize as ptr` casts, but `ptr.addr()` dertainly does not do that.)
So I propose we word the docs a bit more carefully here. ``@Gankra`` what do you think?
Mention implementers of unsatisfied trait
When encountering an unsatisfied trait bound, if there are no other
suggestions, mention all the types that *do* implement that trait:
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `f32: Foo` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/impl_wf.rs:22:6
|
LL | impl Baz<f32> for f32 { }
| ^^^^^^^^ the trait `Foo` is not implemented for `f32`
|
= help: the trait `Foo` is implemented for `i32`
note: required by a bound in `Baz`
--> $DIR/impl_wf.rs:18:31
|
LL | trait Baz<U: ?Sized> where U: Foo { }
| ^^^ required by this bound in `Baz`
```
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `u32: Foo` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/associated-types-path-2.rs:29:5
|
LL | f1(2u32, 4u32);
| ^^ the trait `Foo` is not implemented for `u32`
|
= help: the trait `Foo` is implemented for `i32`
note: required by a bound in `f1`
--> $DIR/associated-types-path-2.rs:13:14
|
LL | pub fn f1<T: Foo>(a: T, x: T::A) {}
| ^^^ required by this bound in `f1`
```
Suggest dereferencing in more cases.
Fix#87437, fix#90970.
When encountering an unsatisfied trait bound, if there are no other
suggestions, mention all the types that *do* implement that trait:
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `f32: Foo` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/impl_wf.rs:22:6
|
LL | impl Baz<f32> for f32 { }
| ^^^^^^^^ the trait `Foo` is not implemented for `f32`
|
= help: the following other types implement trait `Foo`:
Option<T>
i32
str
note: required by a bound in `Baz`
--> $DIR/impl_wf.rs:18:31
|
LL | trait Baz<U: ?Sized> where U: Foo { }
| ^^^ required by this bound in `Baz`
```
Mention implementers of traits in `ImplObligation`s.
Do not mention other `impl`s for closures, ranges and `?`.
Add SyncUnsafeCell.
This adds `SyncUnsafeCell`, which is just `UnsafeCell` except it implements `Sync`.
This was first proposed under the name `RacyUnsafeCell` here: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/53639#issuecomment-415515748 and here: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/53639#issuecomment-432741659 and here: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/53639#issuecomment-888435728
It allows you to create an UnsafeCell that is Sync without having to wrap it in a struct first (and then implement Sync for that struct).
E.g. `static X: SyncUnsafeCell<i32>`. Using a regular `UnsafeCell` as `static` is not possible, because it isn't `Sync`. We have a language workaround for it called `static mut`, but it's nice to be able to use the proper type for such unsafety instead.
It also makes implementing synchronization primitives based on unsafe cells slightly less verbose, because by using `SyncUnsafeCell` for `UnsafeCell`s that are shared between threads, you don't need a separate `impl<..> Sync for ..`. Using this type also clearly documents that the cell is expected to be accessed from multiple threads.
Mark Location::caller() as #[inline]
This function gets compiled to a single register move as it actually gets it's return value passed in as argument.
Fix &mut invalidation in ptr::swap doctest
Under Stacked Borrows with raw pointer tagging, the previous code was UB
because the code which creates the the second pointer borrows the array
through a tag in the borrow stacks below the Unique tag that our first
pointer is based on, thus invalidating the first pointer.
This is not definitely a bug and may never be real UB, but I desperately
want people to write code that conforms to SB with raw pointer tagging
so that I can write good diagnostics. The alternative aliasing models
aren't possible to diagnose well due to state space explosion.
Therefore, it would be super cool if the standard library nudged people
towards writing code that is valid with respect to SB with raw pointer
tagging.
The diagnostics that I want to write are implemented in a branch of Miri and the one for this case is below:
```
error: Undefined Behavior: attempting a read access using <2170> at alloc1068[0x0], but that tag does not exist in the borrow stack for this location
--> /home/ben/rust/library/core/src/intrinsics.rs:2103:14
|
2103 | unsafe { copy_nonoverlapping(src, dst, count) }
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
| |
| attempting a read access using <2170> at alloc1068[0x0], but that tag does not exist in the borrow stack for this location
| this error occurs as part of an access at alloc1068[0x0..0x8]
|
= help: this indicates a potential bug in the program: it performed an invalid operation, but the rules it violated are still experimental
= help: see https://github.com/rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines/blob/master/wip/stacked-borrows.md for further information
help: <2170> was created due to a retag at offsets [0x0..0x10]
--> ../libcore/src/ptr/mod.rs:640:9
|
8 | let x = array[0..].as_mut_ptr() as *mut [u32; 2]; // this is `array[0..2]`
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
help: <2170> was later invalidated due to a retag at offsets [0x0..0x10]
--> ../libcore/src/ptr/mod.rs:641:9
|
9 | let y = array[2..].as_mut_ptr() as *mut [u32; 2]; // this is `array[2..4]`
| ^^^^^
= note: inside `std::intrinsics::copy_nonoverlapping::<[u32; 2]>` at /home/ben/rust/library/core/src/intrinsics.rs:2103:14
= note: inside `std::ptr::swap::<[u32; 2]>` at /home/ben/rust/library/core/src/ptr/mod.rs:685:9
note: inside `main::_doctest_main____libcore_src_ptr_mod_rs_635_0` at ../libcore/src/ptr/mod.rs:12:5
--> ../libcore/src/ptr/mod.rs:644:5
|
12 | ptr::swap(x, y);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
note: inside `main` at ../libcore/src/ptr/mod.rs:15:3
--> ../libcore/src/ptr/mod.rs:647:3
|
15 | } _doctest_main____libcore_src_ptr_mod_rs_635_0() }
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
note: some details are omitted, run with `MIRIFLAGS=-Zmiri-backtrace=full` for a verbose backtrace
error: aborting due to previous error
```
Under Stacked Borrows with raw pointer tagging, the previous code was UB
because the code which creates the the second pointer borrows the array
through a tag in the borrow stacks below the Unique tag that our first
pointer is based on, thus invalidating the first pointer.
This is not definitely a bug and may never be real UB, but I desperately
want people to write code that conforms to SB with raw pointer tagging
so that I can write good diagnostics. The alternative aliasing models
aren't possible to diagnose well due to state space explosion.
Therefore, it would be super cool if the standard library nudged people
towards writing code that is valid with respect to SB with raw pointer
tagging.
Improve doc example of DerefMut
It is more illustrative, after using `*x` to modify the field, to show
in the assertion that the field has indeed been modified.
Add debug assertions to some unsafe functions
As suggested by https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/51713
~~Some similar code calls `abort()` instead of `panic!()` but aborting doesn't work in a `const fn`, and the intrinsic for doing dispatch based on whether execution is in a const is unstable.~~
This picked up some invalid uses of `get_unchecked` in the compiler, and fixes them.
I can confirm that they do in fact pick up invalid uses of `get_unchecked` in the wild, though the user experience is less-than-awesome:
```
Running unittests (target/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/debug/deps/rle_decode_fast-04b7918da2001b50)
running 6 tests
error: test failed, to rerun pass '--lib'
Caused by:
process didn't exit successfully: `/home/ben/rle-decode-helper/target/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/debug/deps/rle_decode_fast-04b7918da2001b50` (signal: 4, SIGILL: illegal instruction)
```
~~As best I can tell these changes produce a 6% regression in the runtime of `./x.py test` when `[rust] debug = true` is set.~~
Latest commit (6894d559bd) brings the additional overhead from this PR down to 0.5%, while also adding a few more assertions. I think this actually covers all the places in `core` that it is reasonable to check for safety requirements at runtime.
Thoughts?
Implement provenance preserving methods on NonNull
### Description
Add the `addr`, `with_addr`, `map_addr` methods to the `NonNull` type, and map the address type to `NonZeroUsize`.
### Motivation
The `NonNull` type is useful for implementing pointer types which have the 0-niche. It is currently possible to implement these provenance preserving functions by calling `NonNull::as_ptr` and `new_unchecked`. The adding these methods makes it more ergonomic.
### Testing
Added a unit test of a non-null tagged pointer type. This is based on some real code I have elsewhere, that currently routes the pointer through a `NonZeroUsize` and back out to produce a usable pointer. I wanted to produce an ideal version of the same tagged pointer struct that preserved pointer provenance.
### Related
Extension of APIs proposed in #95228 . I can also split this out into a separate tracking issue if that is better (though I may need some pointers on how to do that).
Handle rustc_const_stable attribute in library feature collector
The library feature collector in [compiler/rustc_passes/src/lib_features.rs](551b4fa395/compiler/rustc_passes/src/lib_features.rs) has only been looking at `#[stable(…)]`, `#[unstable(…)]`, and `#[rustc_const_unstable(…)]` attributes, while ignoring `#[rustc_const_stable(…)]`. The consequences of this were:
- When any const feature got stabilized (changing one or more `rustc_const_unstable` to `rustc_const_stable`), users who had previously enabled that unstable feature using `#![feature(…)]` would get told "unknown feature", rather than rustc's nicer "the feature … has been stable since … and no longer requires an attribute to enable".
This can be seen in the way that https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93957#issuecomment-1079794660 failed after rebase:
```console
error[E0635]: unknown feature `const_ptr_offset`
--> $DIR/offset_from_ub.rs:1:35
|
LL | #![feature(const_ptr_offset_from, const_ptr_offset)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```
- We weren't enforcing that a particular feature is either stable everywhere or unstable everywhere, and that a feature that has been stabilized has the same stabilization version everywhere, both of which we enforce for the other stability attributes.
This PR updates the library feature collector to handle `rustc_const_stable`, and fixes places in the standard library and test suite where `rustc_const_stable` was being used in a way that does not meet the rules for a stability attribute.
For those consts and functions, only the summary is kept and a reference to the `char` associated const/method is included.
Additionaly, re-exported functions have been converted to function definitions that call the previously re-exported function. This makes it easier to add a deprecated attribute to these functions in the future.
add notes about alignment-altering reallocations to Allocator docs
As I said in https://github.com/rust-lang/wg-allocators/issues/97, the fact that calls to `grow`, `grow_zeroed`, and `shrink` may request altered alignments is surprising and may be a pitfall for implementors of `Allocator` if it's left implicit. This pull request adds a note to the "Safety" section of each function's docs making it explicit.
skip slow int_log tests in Miri
Iterating over i16::MAX many things takes a long time in Miri, let's not do that.
I added https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/pull/2044 on the Miri side to still give us some test coverage.
ptr_metadata test: avoid ptr-to-int transmutes
Pointers can have provenance, integers don't, so transmuting pointers to integers creates "non-standard" values and it is unclear how well those can be supported (https://github.com/rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/286).
So for this test let's take the safer option and use a pointer type instead. That also makes Miri happy. :)
**Description**
Add the `addr`, `with_addr, `map_addr` methods to the `NonNull` type,
and map the address type to `NonZeroUsize`.
**Motiviation**
The `NonNull` type is useful for implementing pointer types which have
the 0-niche. It is currently possible to implement these provenance
preserving functions by calling `NonNull::as_ptr` and `new_unchecked`.
The addition of these methods simply make it more ergonomic to use.
**Testing**
Added a unit test of a nonnull tagged pointer type. This is based on
some real code I have elsewhere, that currently routes the pointer
through a `NonZeroUsize` and back out to produce a usable pointer.
Update target_has_atomic documentation for stabilization
`cfg(target_has_atomic)` was stabilized in #93824, but this small note in the docs was not updated at the time.
allow arbitrary inherent impls for builtin types in core
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/487. Slightly adjusted after some talks with `@m-ou-se` about the requirements of `t-libs-api`.
This adds a crate attribute `#![rustc_coherence_is_core]` which allows arbitrary impls for builtin types in core.
For other library crates impls for builtin types should be avoided if possible. We do have to allow the existing stable impls however. To prevent us from accidentally adding more of these in the future, there is a second attribute `#[rustc_allow_incoherent_impl]` which has to be added to **all impl items**. This only supports impls for builtin types but can easily be extended to additional types in a future PR.
This implementation does not check for overlaps in these impls. Perfectly checking that requires us to check the coherence of these incoherent impls in every crate, as two distinct dependencies may add overlapping methods. It should be easy enough to detect if it goes wrong and the attribute is only intended for use inside of std.
The first two commits are mostly unrelated cleanups.
