use `check_region_obligations_and_report_errors` to avoid ICEs
If we don't call `process_registered_region_obligations` before `resolve_regions_and_report_errors` then we'll ICE if we have any region obligations, and `check_region_obligations_and_report_errors` just does both of these for us in a nice convenient function.
Fixes#53475
r? types
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #99227 (Fix thumbv4t-none-eabi frame pointer setting)
- #99518 (Let-else: break out scopes when a let-else pattern fails to match)
- #99671 (Suggest dereferencing index when trying to use a reference of usize as index)
- #99831 (Add Fuchsia platform support documentation)
- #99881 (fix ICE when computing codegen_fn_attrs on closure with non-fn parent)
- #99888 (Streamline lint checking)
- #99891 (Adjust an expr span to account for macros)
- #99904 (Cleanup html whitespace)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Adjust an expr span to account for macros
Fix this erroneous suggestion:
```
error[E0529]: expected an array or slice, found `Vec<{integer}>`
--> /home/gh-compiler-errors/test.rs:2:9
|
2 | let [..] = vec![1, 2, 3];
| ^^^^ pattern cannot match with input type `Vec<{integer}>`
|
help: consider slicing here
--> /home/gh-compiler-errors/rust2/library/alloc/src/macros.rs:50:36
|
50~ $crate::__rust_force_expr!(<[_]>::into_vec(
51+ #[rustc_box]
52+ $crate::boxed::Box::new([$($x),+])
53~ )[..])
```
fix ICE when computing codegen_fn_attrs on closure with non-fn parent
Other call sites check `has_codegen_attrs` first, so let's do that too.
Fixes#99876
add suggestion when there is a impl of external trait on pointer with wrong coherence rules
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/99572
This will try to improve the node in the error message by suggesting a general solution because the solution, in this case, is application depended.
I'm not super happy regarding the code quality, but I'm happy to have feedback on it.
`@rustbot` r? `@compiler-errors`
Deeply deny fn and raw ptrs in const generics
I think this is right -- just because we wrap a fn ptr in a wrapper type does not mean we should allow it in a const parameter.
We now reject both of these in the same way:
```
#![feature(adt_const_params)]
#[derive(Eq, PartialEq)]
struct Wrapper();
fn foo<const W: Wrapper>() {}
fn foo2<const F: fn()>() {}
```
This does regress one test (`src/test/ui/consts/refs_check_const_eq-issue-88384.stderr`), but I'm not sure it should've passed in the first place.
cc: ``@b-naber`` who introduced that test^
fixes#99641
Check that RPITs constrained by a recursive call in a closure are compatible
Fixes#99073
Adapts a similar visitor pattern to `find_opaque_ty_constraints` (that we use to check TAITs), but with some changes:
0. Only walk the "OnlyBody" children, instead of all items in the RPIT's defining scope
1. Only walk through the body's children if we found a constraining usage
2. Don't actually do any inference, just do a comparison and error if they're mismatched
----
r? `@oli-obk` -- you know all this impl-trait stuff best... is this the right approach? I can explain the underlying issue better if you'd like, in case that might reveal a better solution. Not sure if it's possible to gather up the closure's defining usages of the RPIT while borrowck'ing the outer function, that might be a better place to put this check...
codegen: use new {re,de,}allocator annotations in llvm
This obviates the patch that teaches LLVM internals about
_rust_{re,de}alloc functions by putting annotations directly in the IR
for the optimizer.
The sole test change is required to anchor FileCheck to the body of the
`box_uninitialized` method, so it doesn't see the `allocalign` on
`__rust_alloc` and get mad about the string `alloca` showing up. Since I
was there anyway, I added some checks on the attributes to prove the
right attributes got set.
r? `@nikic`
This obviates the patch that teaches LLVM internals about
_rust_{re,de}alloc functions by putting annotations directly in the IR
for the optimizer.
The sole test change is required to anchor FileCheck to the body of the
`box_uninitialized` method, so it doesn't see the `allocalign` on
`__rust_alloc` and get mad about the string `alloca` showing up. Since I
was there anyway, I added some checks on the attributes to prove the
right attributes got set.
While we're here, we also emit allocator attributes on
__rust_alloc_zeroed. This should allow LLVM to perform more
optimizations for zeroed blocks, and probably fixes#90032. [This
comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/24194#issuecomment-308791157)
mentions "weird UB-like behaviour with bitvec iterators in
rustc_data_structures" so we may need to back this change out if things
go wrong.
The new test cases require LLVM 15, so we copy them into LLVM
14-supporting versions, which we can delete when we drop LLVM 14.
Remove some explicit `self.infcx` for `FnCtxt`, which already derefs into `InferCtxt`
The use of `self.infcx.method_on_infcx` vs `self.method_on_infcx` when `self` is a `FnCtxt` is a bit inconsistent, so I'm moving some `self.infcx` usages I found to just use autoderef
Slightly improve mismatched GAT where clause error
This makes the error reporting a bit more standardized between `where` on GATs and functions.
cc #99206 (`@BoxyUwU),` don't want to mark this as as "fixed" because they're still not perfect, but this is still an improvement IMO so I want to land it incrementally.
regarding "consider adding where clause to trait definition", we don't actually do that for methods as far as i can tell? i could file an issue to look into that maybe.
Use `VecMap::get` in `ConstraintLocator::check`
Also rename the `def_id` param to `item_def_id` because that's easily confused with `self.def_id` (which is the opaque ty did).
Add support for LLVM ShadowCallStack.
LLVMs ShadowCallStack provides backward edge control flow integrity protection by using a separate shadow stack to store and retrieve a function's return address.
LLVM currently only supports this for AArch64 targets. The x18 register is used to hold the pointer to the shadow stack, and therefore this only works on ABIs which reserve x18. Further details are available in the [LLVM ShadowCallStack](https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ShadowCallStack.html) docs.
# Usage
`-Zsanitizer=shadow-call-stack`
# Comments/Caveats
* Currently only enabled for the aarch64-linux-android target
* Requires the platform to define a runtime to initialize the shadow stack, see the [LLVM docs](https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ShadowCallStack.html) for more detail.
