Rename `assert_uninit_valid` intrinsic
It's not about "uninit" anymore but about "filling with 0x01 bytes" so the name should at least try to reflect that.
This is actually not fully correct though, as it does still panic for all uninit with `-Zstrict-init-checks`. I'm not sure what the best way is to deal with that not causing confusion. I guess we could just remove the flag? I don't think having it makes a lot of sense anymore with the direction that we have chose to go. It could be relevant again if #100423 lands so removing it may be a bit over eager.
r? `@RalfJung`
The `<*const T>::guaranteed_*` methods now return an option for the unknown case
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/53020#issuecomment-1236932443
I chose `0` for "not equal" and `1` for "equal" and left `2` for the unknown case so backends can just forward to raw pointer equality and it works ✨
r? `@fee1-dead` or `@lcnr`
cc `@rust-lang/wg-const-eval`
This PR will fix some typos detected by [typos].
I only picked the ones I was sure were spelling errors to fix, mostly in
the comments.
[typos]: https://github.com/crate-ci/typos
Add pointer masking convenience functions
This PR adds the following public API:
```rust
impl<T: ?Sized> *const T {
fn mask(self, mask: usize) -> *const T;
}
impl<T: ?Sized> *mut T {
fn mask(self, mask: usize) -> *const T;
}
// mod intrinsics
fn mask<T>(ptr: *const T, mask: usize) -> *const T
```
This is equivalent to `ptr.map_addr(|a| a & mask)` but also uses a cool llvm intrinsic.
Proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/95643#issuecomment-1121562352
cc `@Gankra` `@scottmcm` `@RalfJung`
r? rust-lang/libs-api
This commit adds the following functions all of which have a signature
`pointer, usize -> pointer`:
- `<*mut T>::mask`
- `<*const T>::mask`
- `intrinsics::ptr_mask`
These functions are equivalent to `.map_addr(|a| a & mask)` but they
utilize `llvm.ptrmask` llvm intrinsic.
*masks your pointers*
Like we have `add`/`sub` which are the `usize` version of `offset`, this adds the `usize` equivalent of `offset_from`. Like how `.add(d)` replaced a whole bunch of `.offset(d as isize)`, you can see from the changes here that it's fairly common that code actually knows the order between the pointers and *wants* a `usize`, not an `isize`.
As a bonus, this can do `sub nuw`+`udiv exact`, rather than `sub`+`sdiv exact`, which can be optimized slightly better because it doesn't have to worry about negatives. That's why the slice iterators weren't using `offset_from`, though I haven't updated that code in this PR because slices are so perf-critical that I'll do it as its own change.
This is an intrinsic, like `offset_from`, so that it can eventually be allowed in CTFE. It also allows checking the extra safety condition -- see the test confirming that CTFE catches it if you pass the pointers in the wrong order.
`Layout` is another type that is sometimes interned, sometimes not, and
we always use references to refer to it so we can't take any advantage
of the uniqueness properties for hashing or equality checks.
This commit renames `Layout` as `LayoutS`, and then introduces a new
`Layout` that is a newtype around an `Interned<LayoutS>`. It also
interns more layouts than before. Previously layouts within layouts
(via the `variants` field) were never interned, but now they are. Hence
the lifetime on the new `Layout` type.
Unlike other interned types, these ones are in `rustc_target` instead of
`rustc_middle`. This reflects the existing structure of the code, which
does layout-specific stuff in `rustc_target` while `TyAndLayout` is
generic over the `Ty`, allowing the type-specific stuff to occur in
`rustc_middle`.
The commit also adds a `HashStable` impl for `Interned`, which was
needed. It hashes the contents, unlike the `Hash` impl which hashes the
pointer.
Introduce NullOp::AlignOf
This PR introduces `Rvalue::NullaryOp(NullOp::AlignOf, ty)`, which will be lowered from `align_of`, similar to `size_of` lowering to `Rvalue::NullaryOp(NullOp::SizeOf, ty)`.
The changes are originally part of #88700 but since it's not dependent on other changes and could have performance impact on its own, it's separated into its own PR.
The new implementation allows some `memcpy`s to be optimized away,
so the uninit value in ui/sanitize/memory.rs is constructed directly
onto the return place. Therefore the sanitizer now says that the
value is allocated by `main` rather than `random`.
