Rollup of 5 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #71421 (Add a function to turn Box<T> into Box<[T]>)
- #71537 (Remove support for self-opening)
- #71551 (Minor refactoring around IndexVec usage in generator transformation)
- #71569 ([miri] Throw UB if target size and data size don't match)
- #71576 (check that `AsRef` and `AsMut` are inlined)
Failed merges:
- #71558 (Cleanup and document `-Z tls-model` )
r? @ghost
Minor refactoring around IndexVec usage in generator transformation
Replace hash map with IndexVec for liveness data.
Utilize IndexVec::push return value to avoid redundant object creation.
r? @eddyb
Remove support for self-opening
This was only used for linkage test cases, which is already covered by
the [run-make-fulldeps/symbol-visibility test](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/test/run-make-fulldeps/symbol-visibility/Makefile) -- which fairly extensively makes
sure we're correctly exporting the right symbols at the right visibility (for
various Rust crate types).
This fixes#10379 and resolves#10356 by removing the test case (and underlying support in the compiler). AFAICT, the better way to test visibility is via nm, like the symbol visibility test. It seems like that's sufficient; I suspect that given that we don't use this we should just drop it (android is tier 2 anyway). But happy to hear otherwise.
Add a function to turn Box<T> into Box<[T]>
Hi,
I think this is very useful, as currently it's not possible in safe rust to do this without re-allocating.
an alternative implementation of the same function can be:
```rust
pub fn into_boxed_slice<T>(boxed: Box<T>) -> Box<[T]> {
unsafe {
let slice = slice::from_raw_parts_mut(Box::into_raw(boxed), 1);
Box::from_raw(slice)
}
}
```
The only thing that makes me a little uncomfortable is this line :
> The alignment of array types is greater or equal to the alignment of its element type
from https://rust-lang.github.io/unsafe-code-guidelines/layout/arrays-and-slices.html
But then I see:
> The alignment of &T, &mut T, *const T and *mut T are the same, and are at least the word size.
> The alignment of &[T] is the word size.
from https://rust-lang.github.io/unsafe-code-guidelines/layout/pointers.html#representation
So I do believe this is valid(FWIW it also passes in miri https://play.rust-lang.org/?gist=c002b99364ee6b29862aeb3565a91c19)
Fix stable(since) attribute for BTreeMap::remove_entry
Stabilized in #70712.
Maybe checking that the since attributes are added correctly should be automated through tidy? This is the third PR I'm opening that fixes a stable(since) attribute for something meant to be stabilized in 1.43 / 1.44 initially but then only stabilized in 1.45. (the other two are #71571, #71574)
Cleanup and document `-C relocation-model`
As the title says, this is mostly a refactoring and documentation.
One potentially observable change here is that `-C relocation-model=default` now takes the default from the Rust target, rather than from the underlying LLVM target. In other words, `-C relocation-model=default` is now equivalent to not specifying the relocation model on command line at all.
Apparently no one used that option because it has other bugs as well, e.g. PIC `default` wasn't treated as PIC in some places.
The referenced `sanitizer-address/Makefile` no longer exists, so perhaps these options are no longer necessary as well.
Even if they are still necessary, they should use `-C relocation-model=static` instead.
If an extern C function is defined as
```
extern "C" {
fn malloc(size: u32) -> *mut std::ffi::c_void;
}
```
on a 64-bit machine(ie. pointer sizes don't match), throw an undefined
behaviour.
Replace thread_local with generator resume arguments in box_region.
Fixes#68922.
Continuation of #70622. Added a short doc, hope it makes sense.
r? @jonas-schievink
Don't hold the predecessor cache lock longer than necessary
#71044 returns a `LockGuard` with the predecessor cache to callers of `Body::predecessors`. As a result, the lock around the predecessor cache could be held for an arbitrarily long time. This PR uses reference counting for ownership of the predecessor cache, meaning the lock is only ever held within `PredecessorCache::compute`. Checking this API for potential sources of deadlock is much easier now, since we no longer have to consider its consumers, only its internals.
This required removing `predecessors_for`, since there is no equivalent to `LockGuard::map` for `Arc` and `Rc`. I believe this could be emulated with `owning_ref::{Arc,Rc}Ref`, but I don't think it's necessary. Also, we continue to return an opaque type from `Body::predecessors` with the lifetime of the `Body`, not `'static`.
This depends on #71044. Only the last two commits are new.
r? @nikomatsakis
[breaking change] Disallow statics initializing themselves
fixes#71078
Self-initialization is unsound because it breaks privacy assumptions that unsafe code can make. In
```rust
pub mod foo {
#[derive(Debug, Copy, Clone)]
pub struct Foo {
x: (),
}
}
pub static FOO: foo::Foo = FOO;
```
unsafe could could expect that ony functions inside the `foo` module were able to create a value of type `Foo`.
Add all remaining `DefKind`s.
r? @eddyb or @Centril
~~I'm not sure if this is what you were thinking of. There are also a few places where I'm not sure what the correct choice is because I don't fully understand the meaning of some variants.~~
~~In general, it feels a bit odd to add some of these as `DefKind`s (e.g. `Arm`) because they don't feel like definitions. Are there things that it makes sense not to add?~~
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #69041 (proc_macro: Stabilize `Span::resolved_at` and `Span::located_at`)
- #69813 (Implement BitOr and BitOrAssign for the NonZero integer types)
- #70712 (stabilize BTreeMap::remove_entry)
- #71168 (Deprecate `{Box,Rc,Arc}::into_raw_non_null`)
- #71544 (Replace filter_map().next() calls with find_map())
- #71545 (Fix comment in docstring example for Error::kind)
- #71548 (Add missing Send and Sync impls for linked list Cursor and CursorMut.)
Failed merges:
r? @ghost
Add missing Send and Sync impls for linked list Cursor and CursorMut.
Someone pointed out these to me, and i think it's indeed reasonable to add those impl.
r? @Amanieu
