There were a few instances of this pattern:
```rust
while index < vec.len() {
let item = &vec[index];
// ...
}
```
These can be indexed at once:
```rust
while let Some(item) = vec.get(index) {
// ...
}
```
Particularly in `ObligationForest::process_obligations`, this mitigates
a codegen regression found with LLVM 11 (#73526).
This adds new optional methods on `Extend`: `extend_one` add a single
element to the collection, and `extend_reserve` pre-allocates space for
the predicted number of incoming elements. These are used in `Iterator`
for `partition` and `unzip` as they shuffle elements one-at-a-time into
their respective collections.
perf: Revert accidental inclusion of a part of #69218
This was accidentally included in #69464 after a rebase and given
how much `inflate` and `keccak` stresses the obligation forest seems
like a likely culprit to the regression in those benchmarks.
(It is necessary in #69218 as obligation forest needs to accurately
track the root variables or unifications will get lost)
Replace fcntl-based file lock with flock
WSL1 does not support `fcntl`-based lock and will always report success,
therefore creating a race condition when multiple rustc processes are
modifying shared data such as `search-index.js`. WSL1 does however
support `flock`.
`flock` is supported by all unix-like platforms. The only caveat is that
Linux 2.6.11 or earlier does not support `flock` on NFS mounts, but as
the minimum supported Linux version is 2.6.18, it is not an issue.
Fixes#72157
update stacker to 0.1.9 to unbreak build on OpenBSD
the version 0.1.8 of stacker (what is currently pinned in Cargo.lock) doesn't build on OpenBSD (see https://github.com/rust-lang/stacker/pull/34).
update the version to 0.1.9
WSL1 does not support `fcntl`-based lock and will always report success,
therefore creating a race condition when multiple rustc processes are
modifying shared data such as `search-index.js`. WSL1 does however
support `flock`.
`flock` is supported by all unix-like platforms. The only caveat is that
Linux 2.6.11 or earlier does not support `flock` on NFS mounts, but as
the minimum supported Linux version is 2.6.18, it is not an issue.
Fixes#72157
Prevent compiler stack overflow for deeply recursive code
I was unable to write a test that
1. runs in under 1s
2. overflows on my machine without this patch
The following reproduces the issue, but I don't think it's sensible to include a test that takes 30s to compile. We can now easily squash newly appearing overflows by the strategic insertion of calls to `ensure_sufficient_stack`.
```rust
// compile-pass
#![recursion_limit="1000000"]
macro_rules! chain {
(EE $e:expr) => {$e.sin()};
(RECURSE $i:ident $e:expr) => {chain!($i chain!($i chain!($i chain!($i $e))))};
(Z $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE EE $e)};
(Y $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE Z $e)};
(X $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE Y $e)};
(A $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE X $e)};
(B $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE A $e)};
(C $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE B $e)};
// causes overflow on x86_64 linux
// less than 1 second until overflow on test machine
// after overflow has been fixed, takes 30s to compile :/
(D $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE C $e)};
(E $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE D $e)};
(F $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE E $e)};
// more than 10 seconds
(G $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE F $e)};
(H $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE G $e)};
(I $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE H $e)};
(J $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE I $e)};
(K $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE J $e)};
(L $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE L $e)};
}
fn main() {
let x = chain!(D 42.0_f32);
}
```
fixes#55471fixes#41884fixes#40161fixes#34844fixes#32594
cc @alexcrichton @rust-lang/compiler
I looked at all code that checks the recursion limit and inserted stack growth calls where appropriate.
By merging the undo_log of all structures part of the snapshot the cost
of creating a snapshot becomes much cheaper. Since snapshots with no or
few changes are so frequent this ends up mattering more than the slight
overhead of dispatching on the variants that map to each field.
We anticipate this to have uses in all sorts of crates and keeping it in
`rustc_data_structures` enables access to it from more locations without
necessarily pulling in the large `librustc` crate.
extend NLL checker to understand `'empty` combined with universes
This PR extends the NLL region checker to understand `'empty` combined with universes. In particular, it means that the NLL region checker no longer considers `exists<R2> { forall<R1> { R1: R2 } }` to be provable. This is work towards https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/59490, but we're not all the way there. One thing in particular it does not address is error messages.
The modifications to the NLL region inference code turned out to be simpler than expected. The main change is to require that if `R1: R2` then `universe(R1) <= universe(R2)`.
This constraint follows from the region lattice (shown below), because we assume then that `R2` is "at least" `empty(Universe(R2))`, and hence if `R1: R2` (i.e., `R1 >= R2` on the lattice) then `R1` must be in some universe that can name `'empty(Universe(R2))`, which requires that `Universe(R1) <= Universe(R2)`.
```
static ----------+-----...------+ (greatest)
| | |
early-bound and | |
free regions | |
| | |
scope regions | |
| | |
empty(root) placeholder(U1) |
| / |
| / placeholder(Un)
empty(U1) -- /
| /
... /
| /
empty(Un) -------- (smallest)
```
I also made what turned out to be a somewhat unrelated change to add a special region to represent `'empty(U0)`, which we use (somewhat hackily) to indicate well-formedness checks in some parts of the compiler. This fixes#68550.
I did some investigation into fixing the error message situation. That's a bit trickier: the existing "nice region error" code around placeholders relies on having better error tracing than NLL currently provides, so that it knows (e.g.) that the constraint arose from applying a trait impl and things like that. I feel like I was hoping *not* to do such fine-grained tracing in NLL, and it seems like we...largely...got away with that. I'm not sure yet if we'll have to add more tracing information or if there is some sort of alternative.
It's worth pointing out though that I've not kind of shifted my opinion on whose job it should be to enforce lifetimes: I tend to think we ought to be moving back towards *something like* the leak-check (just not the one we *had*). If we took that approach, it would actually resolve this aspect of the error message problem, because we would be resolving 'higher-ranked errors' in the trait solver itself, and hence we wouldn't have to thread as much causal information back to the region checker. I think it would also help us with removing the leak check while not breaking some of the existing crates out there.
Regardless, I think it's worth landing this change, because it was relatively simple and it aligns the set of programs that NLL accepts with those that are accepted by the main region checker, and hence should at least *help* us in migration (though I guess we still also have to resolve the existing crates that rely on leak check for coherence).
r? @matthewjasper
allow wasm32 compilation of librustc_data_structures/profiling.rs
I'm trying to use rustfmt from a wasm app. I ran into this compilation problem https://github.com/rust-lang/rustfmt/issues/4132 and after investigating, it looked like just adjusting a few cfg's. I based it on how measureme added support in https://github.com/rust-lang/measureme/pull/43.
My testing on my macbook was just that librustc_data_structures builds now with both:
- cargo build
- cargo build --target wasm32-unknown-unknown
Enable blessing of mir opt tests
cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt
cc @RalfJung
Long overdue, but now you can finally just add a
```rust
// EMIT_MIR rustc.function_name.MirPassName.before.mir
```
(or `after.mir` since most of the time you want to know the MIR after a pass). A `--bless` invocation will automatically create the files for you.
I suggest we do this for all mir opt tests that have all of the MIR in their source anyway
If you use `rustc.function.MirPass.diff` you only get the diff that the MIR pass causes on the MIR.
Fixes#67865
