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`
Debuginfo line information for macro invocations are collapsed by
default - line information are replaced by the line of the outermost
expansion site. Using `-Zdebug-macros` disables this behaviour.
When the `collapse_debuginfo` feature is enabled, the default behaviour
is reversed so that debuginfo is not collapsed by default. In addition,
the `#[collapse_debuginfo]` attribute is available and can be applied to
macro definitions which will then have their line information collapsed.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
Support `#[unix_sigpipe = "inherit|sig_dfl"]` on `fn main()` to prevent ignoring `SIGPIPE`
When enabled, programs don't have to explicitly handle `ErrorKind::BrokenPipe` any longer. Currently, the program
```rust
fn main() { loop { println!("hello world"); } }
```
will print an error if used with a short-lived pipe, e.g.
% ./main | head -n 1
hello world
thread 'main' panicked at 'failed printing to stdout: Broken pipe (os error 32)', library/std/src/io/stdio.rs:1016:9
note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace
by enabling `#[unix_sigpipe = "sig_dfl"]` like this
```rust
#![feature(unix_sigpipe)]
#[unix_sigpipe = "sig_dfl"]
fn main() { loop { println!("hello world"); } }
```
there is no error, because `SIGPIPE` will not be ignored and thus the program will be killed appropriately:
% ./main | head -n 1
hello world
The current libstd behaviour of ignoring `SIGPIPE` before `fn main()` can be explicitly requested by using `#[unix_sigpipe = "sig_ign"]`.
With `#[unix_sigpipe = "inherit"]`, no change at all is made to `SIGPIPE`, which typically means the behaviour will be the same as `#[unix_sigpipe = "sig_dfl"]`.
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/62569 and referenced issues for discussions regarding the `SIGPIPE` problem itself
See the [this](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/219381-t-libs/topic/Proposal.3A.20First.20step.20towards.20solving.20the.20SIGPIPE.20problem) Zulip topic for more discussions, including about this PR.
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/97889
Fix a bunch of typo
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
Migrate rustc_monomorphize to use SessionDiagnostic
### Description
- Migrates diagnostics in `rustc_monomorphize` to use `SessionDiagnostic`
- Adds an `impl IntoDiagnosticArg for PathBuf`
### TODO / Help!
- [x] I'm having trouble figuring out how to apply an optional note. 😕 Help!?
- Resolved. It was bad docs. Fixed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide/pull/1437/files
- [x] `errors:RecursionLimit` should be `#[fatal ...]`, but that doesn't exist so it's `#[error ...]` at the moment.
- Maybe I can switch after this is merged in? --> https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/100694
- Or maybe I need to manually implement `SessionDiagnostic` instead of deriving it?
- [x] How does one go about converting an error inside of [a call to struct_span_lint_hir](8064a49508/compiler/rustc_monomorphize/src/collector.rs (L917-L927))?
- [x] ~What placeholder do you use in the fluent template to refer to the value in a vector? It seems like [this code](0b79f758c9/compiler/rustc_macros/src/diagnostics/diagnostic_builder.rs (L83-L114)) ought to have the answer (or something near it)...but I can't figure it out.~ You can't. Punted.
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
interpret: make read-pointer-as-bytes a CTFE-only error with extra information
Next step in the reaction to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/99923. Also teaches Miri to implicitly strip provenance in more situations when transmuting pointers to integers, which fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/2456.
Pointer-to-int transmutation during CTFE now produces a message like this:
```
= help: this code performed an operation that depends on the underlying bytes representing a pointer
= help: the absolute address of a pointer is not known at compile-time, so such operations are not supported
```
r? ``@oli-obk``
Replace `Body::basic_blocks()` with field access
Since the refactoring in #98930, it is possible to borrow the basic blocks
independently from other parts of MIR by accessing the `basic_blocks` field
directly.
Replace unnecessary `Body::basic_blocks()` method with a direct field access,
which has an additional benefit of borrowing the basic blocks only.
This makes it possible to instruct libstd to never touch the signal
handler for `SIGPIPE`, which makes programs pipeable by default (e.g.
with `./your-program | head -n 1`) without `ErrorKind::BrokenPipe`
errors.
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
Because `PassMode::Cast` is by far the largest variant, but is
relatively rare.
This requires making `PassMode` not impl `Copy`, and `Clone` is no
longer necessary. This causes lots of sigil adjusting, but nothing very
notable.
Replace most uses of `pointer::offset` with `add` and `sub`
As PR title says, it replaces `pointer::offset` in compiler and standard library with `pointer::add` and `pointer::sub`. This generally makes code cleaner, easier to grasp and removes (or, well, hides) integer casts.
This is generally trivially correct, `.offset(-constant)` is just `.sub(constant)`, `.offset(usized as isize)` is just `.add(usized)`, etc. However in some cases we need to be careful with signs of things.
r? ````@scottmcm````
_split off from #100746_
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*
This avoids monomorphizing all linker code for each codegen backend and
will allow passing in extra information to the archive builder from the
codegen backend.
Enable raw-dylib for bin crates
Fixes#93842
When `raw-dylib` is used in a `bin` crate, we need to collect all of the `raw-dylib` functions, generate the import library and add that to the linker command line.
I also changed the tests so that 1) the C++ dlls are created after the Rust dlls, thus there is no chance of accidentally using them in the Rust linking process and 2) disabled generating import libraries when building with MSVC.
Upgrade indexmap and thorin-dwp to use hashbrown 0.12
This removes the last dependencies on hashbrown 0.11.
This also upgrades to hashbrown 0.12.3 to fix a double-free (#99372).
Use constant eval to do strict mem::uninit/zeroed validity checks
I'm not sure about the code organisation here, I just dumped the check in rustc_const_eval at the root. Not hard to move it elsewhere, in any case.
Also, this means cranelift codegen intrinsics lose the strict checks, since they don't seem to depend on rustc_const_eval, and I didn't see a point in keeping around two copies.
I also left comments in the is_zero_valid methods about "uhhh help how do i do this", those apply to both methods equally.
Also rustc_codegen_ssa now depends on rustc_const_eval... is this okay?
Pinging `@RalfJung` since you were the one who mentioned this to me, so I'm assuming you're interested.
Haven't had a chance to run full tests on this since it's really warm, and it's 1AM, I'll check out any failures/comments in the morning :)
