-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.8k
Rustup #14163
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Rustup #14163
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…solver, r=lcnr Do not consider child bound assumptions for rigid alias r? lcnr See first commit for the important details. For second commit, I also stacked a somewhat opinionated name change, though I can separate that if needed. Fixes rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative#149
Refactor FnKind variant to hold &Fn Pulling the change suggested in #128045 to reduce the impact of changing `Fn` item. r? `@oli-obk`
Co-authored-by: FedericoBruzzone <[email protected]>
… enabled Similar to how the alignment is already checked, this adds a check for null pointer dereferences in debug mode. It is implemented similarly to the alignment check as a MirPass. This is related to a 2025H1 project goal for better UB checks in debug mode: rust-lang/rust-project-goals#177.
Insert null checks for pointer dereferences when debug assertions are enabled Similar to how the alignment is already checked, this adds a check for null pointer dereferences in debug mode. It is implemented similarly to the alignment check as a `MirPass`. This inserts checks in the same places as the `CheckAlignment` pass and additionally also inserts checks for `Borrows`, so code like ```rust let ptr: *const u32 = std::ptr::null(); let val: &u32 = unsafe { &*ptr }; ``` will have a check inserted on dereference. This is done because null references are UB. The alignment check doesn't cover these places, because in `&(*ptr).field`, the exact requirement is that the final reference must be aligned. This is something to consider further enhancements of the alignment check. For now this is implemented as a separate `MirPass`, to make it easy to disable this check if necessary. This is related to a 2025H1 project goal for better UB checks in debug mode: rust-lang/rust-project-goals#177. r? `@saethlin`
Implement MIR lowering for unsafe binders This is the final bit of the unsafe binders puzzle. It implements MIR, CTFE, and codegen for unsafe binders, and enforces that (for now) they are `Copy`. Later on, I'll introduce a new trait that relaxes this requirement to being "is `Copy` or `ManuallyDrop<T>`" which more closely models how we treat union fields. Namely, wrapping unsafe binders is now `Rvalue::WrapUnsafeBinder`, which acts much like an `Rvalue::Aggregate`. Unwrapping unsafe binders are implemented as a MIR projection `ProjectionElem::UnwrapUnsafeBinder`, which acts much like `ProjectionElem::Field`. Tracking: - rust-lang/rust#130516
`rustc_middle` is a huge crate and it's always good to move stuff out of it. There are lots of similar methods already on `Span`, so these two functions, `in_external_macro` and `is_from_async_await`, fit right in. The diff is big because `in_external_macro` is used a lot by clippy lints.
Rename `tcx.ensure()` to `tcx.ensure_ok()`, and improve the associated docs This is all based on my archaeology for https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/182449-t-compiler.2Fhelp/topic/.60TyCtxtEnsure.60. The main renamings are: - `tcx.ensure()` → `tcx.ensure_ok()` - `tcx.ensure_with_value()` → `tcx.ensure_done()` - Query modifier `ensure_forwards_result_if_red` → `return_result_from_ensure_ok` Hopefully these new names are a better fit for the *actual* function and purpose of these query call modes.
All callers of EarlyDiagCtxt::early_error now emit a fatal error.
…rieb Convert two `rustc_middle::lint` functions to `Span` methods. `rustc_middle` is a huge crate and it's always good to move stuff out of it. There are lots of similar methods already on `Span`, so these two functions, `in_external_macro` and `is_from_async_await`, fit right in. The diff is big because `in_external_macro` is used a lot by clippy lints. r? ``@Noratrieb``
Couple of cleanups to DiagCtxt and EarlyDiagCtxt
These are hooks to: 1. control whether contract checks are run 2. allow 3rd party tools to intercept and reintepret the results of running contracts.
…ract lang items includes post-developed commit: do not suggest internal-only keywords as corrections to parse failures. includes post-developed commit: removed tabs that creeped in into rustfmt tool source code. includes post-developed commit, placating rustfmt self dogfooding. includes post-developed commit: add backquotes to prevent markdown checking from trying to treat an attr as a markdown hyperlink/ includes post-developed commit: fix lowering to keep contracts from being erroneously inherited by nested bodies (like closures). Rebase Conflicts: - compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/diagnostics.rs - compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/item.rs - compiler/rustc_span/src/hygiene.rs Remove contracts keywords from diagnostic messages
#[contracts::requires(...)] + #[contracts::ensures(...)] cc rust-lang/rust#128044 Updated contract support: attribute syntax for preconditions and postconditions, implemented via a series of desugarings that culminates in: 1. a compile-time flag (`-Z contract-checks`) that, similar to `-Z ub-checks`, attempts to ensure that the decision of enabling/disabling contract checks is delayed until the end user program is compiled, 2. invocations of lang-items that handle invoking the precondition, building a checker for the post-condition, and invoking that post-condition checker at the return sites for the function, and 3. intrinsics for the actual evaluation of pre- and post-condition predicates that third-party verification tools can intercept and reinterpret for their own purposes (e.g. creating shims of behavior that abstract away the function body and replace it solely with the pre- and post-conditions). Known issues: * My original intent, as described in the MCP (rust-lang/compiler-team#759) was to have a rustc-prefixed attribute namespace (like rustc_contracts::requires). But I could not get things working when I tried to do rewriting via a rustc-prefixed builtin attribute-macro. So for now it is called `contracts::requires`. * Our attribute macro machinery does not provide direct support for attribute arguments that are parsed like rust expressions. I spent some time trying to add that (e.g. something that would parse the attribute arguments as an AST while treating the remainder of the items as a token-tree), but its too big a lift for me to undertake. So instead I hacked in something approximating that goal, by semi-trivially desugaring the token-tree attribute contents into internal AST constucts. This may be too fragile for the long-term. * (In particular, it *definitely* breaks when you try to add a contract to a function like this: `fn foo1(x: i32) -> S<{ 23 }> { ... }`, because its token-tree based search for where to inject the internal AST constructs cannot immediately see that the `{ 23 }` is within a generics list. I think we can live for this for the short-term, i.e. land the work, and continue working on it while in parallel adding a new attribute variant that takes a token-tree attribute alongside an AST annotation, which would completely resolve the issue here.) * the *intent* of `-Z contract-checks` is that it behaves like `-Z ub-checks`, in that we do not prematurely commit to including or excluding the contract evaluation in upstream crates (most notably, `core` and `std`). But the current test suite does not actually *check* that this is the case. Ideally the test suite would be extended with a multi-crate test that explores the matrix of enabling/disabling contracts on both the upstream lib and final ("leaf") bin crates.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
r? @ghost
changelog: none