Remove `NullOp::Box`
Follow up of #89030 and MCP rust-lang/compiler-team#460.
~1 month later nothing seems to be broken, apart from a small regression that #89332 (1aac85bb716c09304b313d69d30d74fe7e8e1a8e) shows could be regained by remvoing the diverging path, so it shall be safe to continue and remove `NullOp::Box` completely.
r? `@jonas-schievink`
`@rustbot` label T-compiler
CTFE eval_fn_call: use FnAbi to determine argument skipping and compatibility
This makes use of the `FnAbi` type in CTFE/Miri, which `@eddyb` has been saying for years is what we should do.^^ `FnAbi` is used to
- determine which arguments to skip (rather than the previous heuristic of skipping ZST arguments with the Rust ABI)
- impose further restrictions on whether caller and callee are consistent in how a given argument is passed
I was hoping it would also simplify the code, but that is not the case -- the previous type compatibility checks are still required (AFAIK), only the ZST skipping is gone and that took barely any code. We also need some hacks because `FnAbi` assumes a certain way of implementing `caller_location` (by passing extra arguments), but Miri can just read the caller location from the call stack so it doesn't need those arguments. (The fact that every backend has to separately implement support for these arguments seems suboptimal -- looks like this might have been better implemented on the MIR level.) To avoid having to implement those unnecessary arguments in Miri, we just compute *whether* the argument is present on the caller/callee side, but don't actually pass that argument around.
I have no idea if this looks the way `@eddyb` thinks it should look... but it makes Miri's test suite pass. ;)
One of rustc's tests fails unfortunately (`ui/const-generics/issues/issue-67739.rs`), some const generic code that is evaluated too early -- I think that should raise `TooGeneric` but instead it ICEs. My assumption is this is some FnAbi code that has not been properly tested on polymorphic code, but it might also be me calling that FnAbi code the wrong way.
r? `@oli-obk` `@eddyb`
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/56166
Miri PR at https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/pull/1928
The `AggregateKind` enum ends up in the final mir `Body`. Currently,
any changes to `AdtDef` (regardless of how significant they are)
will legitimately cause the overall result of `optimized_mir` to change,
invalidating any codegen re-use involving that mir.
This will get worse once we start hashing the `Span` inside `FieldDef`
(which is itself contained in `AdtDef`).
To try to reduce these kinds of invalidations, this commit changes
`AggregateKind::Adt` to store just the `DefId`, instead of the full
`AdtDef`. This allows the result of `optimized_mir` to be unchanged
if the `AdtDef` changes in a way that doesn't actually affect any
of the MIR we build.
Remove `SymbolStr`
This was originally proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/74554#discussion_r466203544. As well as removing the icky `SymbolStr` type, it allows the removal of a lot of `&` and `*` occurrences.
Best reviewed one commit at a time.
r? `@oli-obk`
Looser check for overflowing_binary_op
Fix for issue #91636 tight check resulted in ICE, this makes the check a little looser. It seems `eq` allows comparing of `supertype` and `subtype` if `lhs = supertype` and `rhs = subtype` but not vice versa, is this intended behavior ?
Allow for failure of subst_normalize_erasing_regions in const_eval
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/72845
Using associated types that cannot be normalized previously resulted in an ICE. We now allow for normalization failure and return a "TooGeneric" error in that case.
r? ```@RalfJung``` maybe?
Add a MIR pass manager (Taylor's Version)
The final draft of #91386 and #77665.
While the compile-time constraints in #91386 are cool, I decided on a more minimal approach for now. I want to explore phase constraints and maybe relative-ordering constraints in the future, though. This should preserve existing behavior **exactly** (please let me know if it doesn't) while making the following changes to the way we organize things today:
- Each `MirPhase` now corresponds to a single MIR pass. `run_passes` is not responsible for listing the correct MIR phase.
- `run_passes` no longer silently skips passes if the declared MIR phase is greater than or equal to the body's. This has bitten me multiple times. If you want this behavior, you can always branch on `body.phase` yourself.
- If your pass is solely to emit errors, you can use the `MirLint` interface instead, which gets a shared reference to `Body` instead of a mutable one. By differentiating the two, I hope to make it clearer in the short term where lints belong in the pipeline. In the long term perhaps we could enforce this at compile-time?
- MIR is no longer dumped for passes that aren't enabled, or for lints.
I tried to check that `-Zvalidate` still works correctly, since the MIR phase is now updated as soon as the associated pass is done, instead of at the end of all the passes in `run_passes`. However, it looks like `-Zvalidate` is broken with current nightlies anyways 😢 (it spits out a bunch of errors).
cc `@oli-obk` `@wesleywiser`
r? rust-lang/wg-mir-opt
Rollup of 12 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #89954 (Fix legacy_const_generic doc arguments display)
- #91321 (Handle placeholder regions in NLL type outlive constraints)
- #91329 (Fix incorrect usage of `EvaluatedToOk` when evaluating `TypeOutlives`)
- #91364 (Improve error message for incorrect field accesses through raw pointers)
- #91387 (Clarify and tidy up explanation of E0038)
- #91410 (Move `#![feature(const_precise_live_drops)]` checks earlier in the pipeline)
- #91435 (Improve diagnostic for missing half of binary operator in `if` condition)
- #91444 (disable tests in Miri that take too long)
- #91457 (Add additional test from rust issue number 91068)
- #91460 (Document how `last_os_error` should be used)
- #91464 (Document file path case sensitivity)
- #91466 (Improve the comments in `Symbol::interner`.)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Move `#![feature(const_precise_live_drops)]` checks earlier in the pipeline
Should mitigate the issues found during MCP on #73255.
Once this is done, we should clean up the queries a bit, since I think `mir_drops_elaborated_and_const_checked` can be merged back into `mir_promoted`.
Fixes#90770.
cc ``@rust-lang/wg-const-eval``
r? ``@nikomatsakis`` (since they reviewed #71824)
Cleanup: Eliminate ConstnessAnd
This is almost a behaviour-free change and purely a refactoring. "almost" because we appear to be using the wrong ParamEnv somewhere already, and this is now exposed by failing a test using the unstable `~const` feature.
We most definitely need to review all `without_const` and at some point should probably get rid of many of them by using `TraitPredicate` instead of `TraitRef`.
This is a continuation of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/90274.
r? `@oli-obk`
cc `@spastorino` `@ecstatic-morse`
CTFE: support assert_zero_valid and assert_uninit_valid
This ensures the implementation of all three type-based assert_ intrinsics remains consistent in Miri.
`assert_inhabited` recently got stabilized in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/90896 (meaning stable `const fn` can call it), so do the same with these other intrinsics.
Cc ```@rust-lang/wg-const-eval```
Nothing else makes sense, and there is no "danger" in doing so, as it only does something if there are const bounds, which are unstable. This used to happen implicitly via the inferctxt before, which was much more fragile.
Perform Sync check on static items in wf-check instead of during const checks
r? `@RalfJung`
This check is solely happening on the signature of the static item and not on its body, therefor it belongs into wf-checking instead of const checking.
Make `TypeFolder::fold_*` return `Result`
Implements rust-lang/compiler-team#432.
Initially this is just a rebase of `@LeSeulArtichaut's` work in #85469 (abandoned; see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/85485#issuecomment-908781112). At that time, it caused a regression in performance that required some further exploration... with this rebased PR bors can hopefully report some perf analysis from which we can investigate further (if the regression is indeed still present).
r? `@jackh726` cc `@nikomatsakis`
