Use better error message for hard errors in CTFE
I noticed this while working on #86255: currently the same message is used for hard errors and soft errors in CTFE. This changes the error messages to make hard errors use a message that indicates the reality of the situation correctly, since usage of the constant is never allowed when there was a hard error evaluating it. This doesn't affect the behaviour of these error messages, only the content.
This changes the error logic to check if the error should be hard or soft where it is generated, instead of where it is emitted, to allow this distinction in error messages.
Currently the same message is used for hard errors and soft errors. This
makes hard errors use a message that indicates the reality of the
situation correctly, since usage of the constant is never allowed when
there was a hard error evaluating it.
Detect incorrect vtable alignment during const eval
This PR fixes#86132 by detecting invalid alignment values for trait objects in the interpreter, and emitting an error about this conversion failure, to avoid the ICE.
I've noticed that the error emitted at a50d72158e/compiler/rustc_mir/src/interpret/traits.rs (L163-L166) doesn't seem to be present in the const-ub tests, so I've tried adding a test that triggers both of these cases: one for the invalid size, and another for the invalid alignment that #86132 tracks (I have found different magic values triggering different `Align::from_bytes` errors than the "power of 2" one, if need be).
However, when doing that, I *cannot* for the life of me figure out the correct incantation to make these 2 errors trigger with the "it is undefined behavior to use this value" message rather than the "any use of this value will cause an error" lint.
I've tried Oli's suggestions of different values, tuples and arrays, using the transparent wrapper trick from the other tests and I was only able to trigger the regular const-ub errors about the size of the vtable, or that the drop pointer was invalid. Maybe these "type validation failed" errors happen before this part of the interpreter is reached and there just needs some magic incorrect values to bypass them, I don't know.
Since this fixes an ICE, and if the constants are indeed used, these 2 tests will turn into a hard error, I thought I'd open the PR anyways. And if ```@RalfJung``` you know of a way I could manage that (if you think that these tests are worth checking that the `throw_ub_format!` does indeed create const-ub errors as we expect) I'd be grateful.
For that reason, r? ```@RalfJung``` and cc ```@oli-obk.```
Make copy/copy_nonoverlapping fn's again
Make copy/copy_nonoverlapping fn's again, rather than intrinsics.
This a short-term change to address issue #84297.
It effectively reverts PRs #81167#81238 (and part of #82967), #83091, and parts of #79684.
Emit a hard error when a panic occurs during const-eval
Previous, a panic during const evaluation would go through the
`const_err` lint. This PR ensures that such a panic always causes
compilation to fail.
Post-monomorphization errors traces MVP
This PR works towards better diagnostics for the errors encountered in #85155 and similar.
We can encounter post-monomorphization errors (PMEs) when collecting mono items. The current diagnostics are confusing for these cases when they happen in a dependency (but are acceptable when they happen in the local crate).
These kinds of errors will be more likely now that `stdarch` uses const generics for its intrinsics' immediate arguments, and validates these const arguments with a mechanism that triggers such PMEs.
(Not to mention that the errors happen during codegen, so only when building code that actually uses these code paths. Check builds don't trigger them, neither does unused code)
So in this PR, we detect these kinds of errors during the mono item graph walk: if any error happens while collecting a node or its neighbors, we print a diagnostic about the current collection step, so that the user has at least some context of which erroneous code and dependency triggered the error.
The diagnostics for issue #85155 now have this note showing the source of the erroneous const argument:
```
note: the above error was encountered while instantiating `fn std::arch::x86_64::_mm_blend_ps::<51_i32>`
--> issue-85155.rs:11:24
|
11 | let _blended = _mm_blend_ps(a, b, 0x33);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
error: aborting due to previous error
```
Note that #85155 is a reduced version of a case happening in the wild, to indirect users of the `rustfft` crate, as seen in https://github.com/ejmahler/RustFFT/issues/74. The crate had a few of these out-of-range immediates. Here's how the diagnostics in this PR would have looked on one of its examples before it was fixed:
<details>
```
error[E0080]: evaluation of constant value failed
--> ./stdarch/crates/core_arch/src/macros.rs:8:9
|
8 | assert!(IMM >= MIN && IMM <= MAX, "IMM value not in expected range");
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ the evaluated program panicked at 'IMM value not in expected range', ./stdarch/crates/core_arch/src/macros.rs:8:9
|
= note: this error originates in the macro `$crate::panic::panic_2015` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
note: the above error was encountered while instantiating `fn _mm_blend_ps::<51_i32>`
--> /tmp/RustFFT/src/avx/avx_vector.rs:1314:23
|
1314 | let blended = _mm_blend_ps(rows[0], rows[2], 0x33);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
note: the above error was encountered while instantiating `fn _mm_permute_pd::<5_i32>`
--> /tmp/RustFFT/src/avx/avx_vector.rs:1859:9
|
1859 | _mm_permute_pd(self, 0x05)
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
note: the above error was encountered while instantiating `fn _mm_permute_pd::<15_i32>`
--> /tmp/RustFFT/src/avx/avx_vector.rs:1863:32
|
1863 | (_mm_movedup_pd(self), _mm_permute_pd(self, 0x0F))
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
error: aborting due to previous error
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0080`.
error: could not compile `rustfft`
To learn more, run the command again with --verbose.
```
</details>
I've developed and discussed this with them, so maybe r? `@oli-obk` -- but feel free to redirect to someone else of course.
(I'm not sure we can say that this PR definitely closes issue 85155, as it's still unclear exactly which diagnostics and information would be interesting to report in such cases -- and we've discussed printing backtraces before. I have prototypes of some complete and therefore noisy backtraces I showed Oli, but we decided to not include them in this PR for now)
This test reproduces post-monomorphization errors one can encounter
when using incorrect immediate arguments to some of the stdarch
intrinsics using const generics.
Make building THIR a stealable query
This PR creates a stealable `thir_body` query so that we can build the THIR only once for THIR unsafeck and MIR build.
Blocked on #83842.
r? `@nikomatsakis`
Remove rustc_args_required_const attribute
Now that stdarch no longer needs it (thanks `@Amanieu!),` we can kill the `rustc_args_required_const` attribute. This means that lifetime extension of references to temporaries is the only remaining job that promotion is performing. :-)
r? `@oli-obk`
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/69493
Introduce the beginning of a THIR unsafety checker
This poses the foundations for the THIR unsafety checker, so that it can be implemented incrementally:
- implements a rudimentary `Visitor` for the THIR (which will definitely need some tweaking in the future)
- introduces a new `-Zthir-unsafeck` flag which tells the compiler to use THIR unsafeck instead of MIR unsafeck
- implements detection of unsafe functions
- adds revisions to the UI tests to test THIR unsafeck alongside MIR unsafeck
This uses a very simple query design, where bodies are unsafety-checked on a body per body basis. This however has some big flaws:
- the unsafety-checker builds the THIR itself, which means a lot of work is duplicated with MIR building constructing its own copy of the THIR
- unsafety-checking closures is currently completely wrong: closures should take into account the "safety context" in which they are created, here we are considering that closures are always a safe context
I had intended to fix these problems in follow-up PRs since they are always gated under the `-Zthir-unsafeck` flag (which is explicitely noted to be unsound).
r? `@nikomatsakis`
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/project-thir-unsafeck/issues/3https://github.com/rust-lang/project-thir-unsafeck/issues/7
Bump stdarch submodule
Major changes:
- More AVX-512 intrinsics.
- More ARM & AArch64 NEON intrinsics.
- Updated unstable WASM intrinsics to latest draft standards.
- Intrinsics that previously used `#[rustc_args_required_const]` now use const generics. See #83167 for more details.
- `std_detect` is now a separate crate instead of a submodule of `std`.
