Combine `ty::Projection` and `ty::Opaque` into `ty::Alias`
Implements https://github.com/rust-lang/types-team/issues/79.
This PR consolidates `ty::Projection` and `ty::Opaque` into a single `ty::Alias`, with an `AliasKind` and `AliasTy` type (renamed from `ty::ProjectionTy`, which is the inner data of `ty::Projection`) defined as so:
```
enum AliasKind {
Projection,
Opaque,
}
struct AliasTy<'tcx> {
def_id: DefId,
substs: SubstsRef<'tcx>,
}
```
Since we don't have access to `TyCtxt` in type flags computation, and because repeatedly calling `DefKind` on the def-id is expensive, these two types are distinguished with `ty::AliasKind`, conveniently glob-imported into `ty::{Projection, Opaque}`. For example:
```diff
match ty.kind() {
- ty::Opaque(..) =>
+ ty::Alias(ty::Opaque, ..) => {}
_ => {}
}
```
This PR also consolidates match arms that treated `ty::Opaque` and `ty::Projection` identically.
r? `@ghost`
compiler: remove unnecessary imports and qualified paths
Some of these imports were necessary before Edition 2021, others were already in the prelude.
I hope it's fine that this PR is so spread-out across files :/
Add LLVM KCFI support to the Rust compiler
This PR adds LLVM Kernel Control Flow Integrity (KCFI) support to the Rust compiler. It initially provides forward-edge control flow protection for operating systems kernels for Rust-compiled code only by aggregating function pointers in groups identified by their return and parameter types. (See llvm/llvm-project@cff5bef.)
Forward-edge control flow protection for C or C++ and Rust -compiled code "mixed binaries" (i.e., for when C or C++ and Rust -compiled code share the same virtual address space) will be provided in later work as part of this project by identifying C char and integer type uses at the time types are encoded (see Type metadata in the design document in the tracking issue #89653).
LLVM KCFI can be enabled with -Zsanitizer=kcfi.
Thank you again, `@bjorn3,` `@eddyb,` `@nagisa,` and `@ojeda,` for all the help!
This commit adds LLVM Kernel Control Flow Integrity (KCFI) support to
the Rust compiler. It initially provides forward-edge control flow
protection for operating systems kernels for Rust-compiled code only by
aggregating function pointers in groups identified by their return and
parameter types. (See llvm/llvm-project@cff5bef.)
Forward-edge control flow protection for C or C++ and Rust -compiled
code "mixed binaries" (i.e., for when C or C++ and Rust -compiled code
share the same virtual address space) will be provided in later work as
part of this project by identifying C char and integer type uses at the
time types are encoded (see Type metadata in the design document in the
tracking issue #89653).
LLVM KCFI can be enabled with -Zsanitizer=kcfi.
Co-authored-by: bjorn3 <17426603+bjorn3@users.noreply.github.com>
This ensures that the error is printed even for unused variables,
as well as unifying the handling between the LLVM and GCC backends.
This also fixes unusual behavior around exported Rust-defined variables
with linkage attributes. With the previous behavior, it appears to be
impossible to define such a variable such that it can actually be imported
and used by another crate. This is because on the importing side, the
variable is required to be a pointer, but on the exporting side, the
type checker rejects static variables of pointer type because they do
not implement `Sync`. Even if it were possible to import such a type, it
appears that code generation on the importing side would add an unexpected
additional level of pointer indirection, which would break type safety.
This highlighted that the semantics of linkage on Rust-defined variables
is different to linkage on foreign items. As such, we now model the
difference with two different codegen attributes: linkage for Rust-defined
variables, and import_linkage for foreign items.
This change gives semantics to the test
src/test/ui/linkage-attr/auxiliary/def_illtyped_external.rs which was
previously expected to fail to compile. Therefore, convert it into a
test that is expected to successfully compile.
The update to the GCC backend is speculative and untested.
Avoid some `InferCtxt::build` calls
Either because we're inside of an `InferCtxt` already, or because we're not in a place where we'd ever see inference vars.
r? types
Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #101975 (Suggest to use . instead of :: when accessing a method of an object)
- #105141 (Fix ICE on invalid variable declarations in macro calls)
- #105224 (Properly substitute inherent associated types.)
- #105236 (Add regression test for #47814)
- #105247 (Use parent function WfCheckingContext to check RPITIT.)
- #105253 (Update a couple of rustbuild deps)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Remove drop order twist of && and || and make them associative
Previously a short circuiting binop chain (chain of && or ||s) would drop the temporaries created by the first element after all the other elements, and otherwise follow evaluation order. So `f(1).g() && f(2).g() && f(3).g() && f(4).g()` would drop the temporaries in the order `2,3,4,1`. This made `&&` and `||` non-associative regarding drop order. In other words, adding ()'s to the expression would change drop order: `f(1).g() && (f(2).g() && f(3).g()) && f(4).g()` for example would drop in the order `3,2,4,1`.
As, except for the bool result, there is no data returned by the sub-expressions of the short circuiting binops, we can safely discard of any temporaries created by the sub-expr. Previously, code was already putting the rhs's into terminating scopes, but missed it for the lhs's.
This commit addresses this "twist". We now also put the lhs into a terminating scope. The drop order of the above expressions becomes `1,2,3,4`.
There might be code relying on the current order, and therefore I'd recommend doing a crater run to gauge the impact. I'd argue that such code is already quite wonky as it is one `foo() &&` addition away from breaking. ~~For the impact, I don't expect any *build* failures, as the compiler gets strictly more tolerant: shortening the lifetime of temporaries only expands the list of programs the compiler accepts as valid. There might be *runtime* failures caused by this change however.~~ Edit: both build and runtime failures are possible, e.g. see the example provided by dtolnay [below](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/103293#issuecomment-1285341113). Edit2: the crater run has finished and [results](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/103293#issuecomment-1292275203) are that there is only one build failure which is easy to fix with a +/- 1 line diff.
I've included a testcase that now compiles thanks to this patch.
The breakage is also limited to drop order relative to conditionals in the && chain: that is, in code like this:
```Rust
let hello = foo().hi() && bar().world();
println!("hi");
```
we already drop the temporaries of `foo().hi()` before we reach "hi".
I'd ideally have this PR merged before let chains are stabilized. If this PR is taking too long, I'd love to have a more restricted version of this change limited to `&&`'s in let chains: the `&&`'s of such chains are quite special anyways as they accept `let` bindings, in there the `&&` is therefore more a part of the "if let chain" construct than a construct of its own.
Fixes#103107
Status: waiting on [this accepted FCP](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/103293#issuecomment-1293411354) finishing.
This avoids creation of a terminating scope in
chains that contain both && and ||, because
also there we know that a terminating scope is
not neccessary: all the chain members are already
in such terminating scopes.
Also add a mixed && / || test.
Previously a short circuiting && chain would drop the
first element after all the other elements, and otherwise
follow evaluation order, so code like:
f(1).g() && f(2).g() && f(3).g() && f(4).g()
would drop the temporaries in the order 2,3,4,1. This made
&& and || non-associative regarding drop order, so
adding ()'s to the expression would change drop order:
f(1).g() && (f(2).g() && f(3).g()) && f(4).g()
for example would drop in the order 3,2,4,1.
As, except for the bool result, there is no data returned
by the sub-expressions of the short circuiting binops,
we can safely discard of any temporaries created by the
sub-expr. Previously, code was already putting the rhs's
into terminating scopes, but missed it for the lhs's.
This commit addresses this "twist". In the expression,
we now also put the lhs into a terminating scope.
The drop order for the above expressions is 1,2,3,4
now.
Check lifetime param count in `collect_trait_impl_trait_tys`
We checked the type and const generics count, but not the lifetimes, which were handled in a different function.
Fixes#105154
