Issue-125323: ICE non-ADT in struct pattern when long time constant evaluation is in for loop
This PR fixes#125323
## Context
According to the issue, the ICE happens since #121206.
In the PR, some error methods were reorganized. For example, has_errors() was renamed to has_errors_exclude_lint_errors(). However, some codes which used the original has_errors() were not switched to has_errors_exclude_lint_errors(). I finally found that report_error() in writeback.rs causes this ICE. Currently the method uses tainted_by_errors() to get guar (ErrorGuaranteed), but originally it used dcx().has_errors() but it wasn't changed to has_errors_exclude_lint_errors() when changes in #121206 were merged. I don't think I fully understand how an error is propagated, but I suppose that the error from long time constant evaluation is unexpectedly propagated other parts (in this ICE, for loop), then cause the non-ADT in struct pattern ICE.
## Change
- Fix report_error() in writeback.rs: use dcx().has_errors_exclude_lint_errors() instead of tainted_by_errors() to prevent error propagation from constant evaluation.
- Add test for the ICE
- Modify some tests to align the change: Due to this fix, E0282 error happens (or not happen anymore) in some tests.
## NOTE
The 4th commit aims to revert the fix in #123516 because I confirmed that the ICE solved by the PR doesn't happen if I modify report_error(). I think the root cause of that ICE is the same as #125323 . But I can discard this commit since we can fix#125323 without it.
Simplify trivial constants in SimplifyConstCondition
After `InstSimplify-after-simplifycfg` with `-Zub_checks=false`, there are many of the following patterns.
```
_13 = const false;
assume(copy _13);
_12 = unreachable_unchecked::precondition_check() -> [return: bb1, unwind unreachable];
```
Simplifying them to unreachable early should make CFG simpler.
error from const eval lint causes ICE at check_pat in late_lint, because the function expects the typeck result isn't tainted by error but it is.
To avoid the ICE, check_pat returns earlier if the typeck_result is tainted.
check_mod_deathness also has an issue from the same reason. visit_body for making live symbols expects the typeck result has no error.
So this commit adds a check in visit_nested_body to avoid the ICE.
However, if visit_nested_body just returns without doing anything, all codes with the error are marked as dead, because live_symbols is empty.
To avoid this side effect, visit_nested_body and other visit_* functions in MarkSymbolVistior should return appropriate error.
If a function returns ControlFlow::Break, live_symbols_and_ignore_derived_traits returns earlier with error,
then check_mod_deathness, the caller of the function returns earlier without pushing everything into dead_codes.
Fix ICE on offsetted ZST pointer
I'm not sure this is the *right* fix, but it's simple enough and does roughly what I'd expect. Like with the previous optimization to codegen usize rather than a zero-sized static, there's no guarantee that we continue returning a particular value from the offsetting.
A grep for `const_usize.*align` found the same code copied to rustc_codegen_gcc and cranelift but a quick skim didn't find other cases of similar 'optimization'. That said, I'm not convinced I caught everything, it's not trivial to search for this.
Closesrust-lang/rust#147516
Rehome 30 `tests/ui/issues/` tests to other subdirectories under `tests/ui/` [#4 of Batch #2]
Part of rust-lang/rust#133895
Methodology:
1. Refer to the previously written `tests/ui/SUMMARY.md`
2. Find an appropriate category for the test, using the original issue thread and the test contents.
3. Add the issue URL at the bottom (not at the top, as that would mess up stderr line numbers)
4. Rename the tests to make their purpose clearer
Inspired by the methodology that `@Kivooeo` was using.
r? `@jieyouxu`
test: Subtract code_offset from width for ui_testing
`annotate-snippets` does not have a "UI test" mode like `rustc`, [where the code offset is not subtracted from the column width](f34ba774c7/compiler/rustc_errors/src/emitter.rs (L1985-L1987)). This makes it so `annotate-snippets` will shift the output for some very long tests 5 - 7 columns to the left. As part of my work to have `rustc` use `annotate-snippets`, and to reduce the test differences between the two, I figured it would be best if `rustc` started subtracting the code offset from the width as well.
The first commit exists to keep the test output changes of adding a new line to a test separate from adding the `--diagnostic-width` flag in the second commit. This makes it easier to verify that adding the flag does not affect the test's output.
[Zulip discussion](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/147480-t-compiler.2Fdiagnostics/topic/annotate-snippets.20hurdles)
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- rust-lang/rust#146556 (Fix duration_since panic on unix when std is built with integer overflow checks)
- rust-lang/rust#146679 (Clarify Display for error should not include source)
- rust-lang/rust#146753 (Improve the pretty print of UnstableFeature clause)
- rust-lang/rust#146894 (Improve derive suggestion of const param)
- rust-lang/rust#146950 (core: simplify `CStr::default()`)
- rust-lang/rust#146958 (Fix infinite recursion in Path::eq with String)
- rust-lang/rust#146971 (fix ICE in writeback due to bound regions)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Rehome 30 `tests/ui/issues/` tests to other subdirectories under `tests/ui/` [#3 of Batch #2]
Part of rust-lang/rust#133895
Methodology:
1. Refer to the previously written `tests/ui/SUMMARY.md`
2. Find an appropriate category for the test, using the original issue thread and the test contents.
3. Add the issue URL at the bottom (not at the top, as that would mess up stderr line numbers)
4. Rename the tests to make their purpose clearer
Inspired by the methodology that `@Kivooeo` was using.
r? `@jieyouxu`
This reverts commit 1eeb8e8b15, reversing
changes made to 324bf2b9fd.
Unfortunately the assert desugaring change is not backwards compatible,
see RUST-145770.
Code such as
```rust
#[derive(Debug)]
struct F {
data: bool
}
impl std::ops::Not for F {
type Output = bool;
fn not(self) -> Self::Output { !self.data }
}
fn main() {
let f = F { data: true };
assert!(f);
}
```
would be broken by the assert desugaring change. We may need to land
the change over an edition boundary, or limit the editions that the
desugaring change impacts.
a more general version of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/146080.
after a bit of hacking in [`fluent.rs`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/compiler/rustc_fluent_macro/src/fluent.rs), i discovered that i'm not the only one that is bad at following guidelines 😅. this pr lowercases the first letter of all the error messages in the codebase.
(i did not change things that are traditionally uppercased such as _MIR_, _ABI_ or _C_)
i think it's reasonable to run a `@bors try` so all the test suite is checked, as i cannot run some of the tests on my machine. i double checked (and replaced manually) all the old error messages, but better be safe than sorry.
in the future i will try to add a check in `x test tidy` that errors if an error message starts with an uppercase letter.
Implement some more checks in `ptr_guaranteed_cmp`.
* Pointers with different residues modulo their allocations' least common alignment are never equal.
* Pointers to the same static allocation are equal if and only if they have the same offset.
* Pointers to different non-zero-sized static allocations are unequal if both point within their allocation, and not on opposite ends.
Tracking issue for `const_raw_ptr_comparison`: <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/53020>
This should not affect `is_null`, the only usage of this intrinsic on stable.
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/144584
All function pointers are currently treated as unaligned anyway;
any change implementing function pointer alignment during consteval should add
tests that it works properly on arm::t32 functions.
Pointers with different residues modulo their least common allocation alignment are never equal.
Pointers to the same static allocation are equal if and only if they have the same offset.
Strictly in-bounds (in-bounds and not one-past-the-end) pointers to different static allocations are always unequal.
A pointer cannot be equal to an integer if `ptr-int` cannot be null.
Also adds more tests for `ptr_guaranteed_cmp`.
Co-authored-by: Ralf Jung <post@ralfj.de>
Rehome 37 `tests/ui/issues/` tests to other subdirectories under `tests/ui/`
Part of rust-lang/rust#133895
Methodology:
1. Refer to the previously written `tests/ui/SUMMARY.md`
2. Find an appropriate category for the test, using the original issue thread and the test contents.
3. Add the issue URL at the bottom (not at the top, as that would mess up stderr line numbers)
4. Rename the tests to make their purpose clearer
Inspired by the methodology that ``@Kivooeo`` was using.
r? ``@jieyouxu``
const-eval: full support for pointer fragments
This fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/const-eval/issues/72 and makes `swap_nonoverlapping` fully work in const-eval by enhancing per-byte provenance tracking with tracking of *which* of the bytes of the pointer this one is. Later, if we see all the same bytes in the exact same order, we can treat it like a whole pointer again without ever risking a leak of the data bytes (that encode the offset into the allocation). This lifts the limitation that was discussed quite a bit in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/137280.
For a concrete piece of code that used to fail and now works properly consider this example doing a byte-for-byte memcpy in const without using intrinsics:
```rust
use std::{mem::{self, MaybeUninit}, ptr};
type Byte = MaybeUninit<u8>;
const unsafe fn memcpy(dst: *mut Byte, src: *const Byte, n: usize) {
let mut i = 0;
while i < n {
*dst.add(i) = *src.add(i);
i += 1;
}
}
const _MEMCPY: () = unsafe {
let ptr = &42;
let mut ptr2 = ptr::null::<i32>();
// Copy from ptr to ptr2.
memcpy(&mut ptr2 as *mut _ as *mut _, &ptr as *const _ as *const _, mem::size_of::<&i32>());
assert!(*ptr2 == 42);
};
```
What makes this code tricky is that pointers are "opaque blobs" in const-eval, we cannot just let people look at the individual bytes since *we don't know what those bytes look like* -- that depends on the absolute address the pointed-to object will be placed at. The code above "breaks apart" a pointer into individual bytes, and then puts them back together in the same order elsewhere. This PR implements the logic to properly track how those individual bytes relate to the original pointer, and to recognize when they are in the right order again.
We still reject constants where the final value contains a not-fully-put-together pointer: I have no idea how one could construct an LLVM global where one byte is defined as "the 3rd byte of a pointer to that other global over there" -- and even if LLVM supports this somehow, we can leave implementing that to a future PR. It seems unlikely to me anyone would even want this, but who knows.^^
This also changes the behavior of Miri, by tracking the order of bytes with provenance and only considering a pointer to have valid provenance if all bytes are in the original order again. This is related to https://github.com/rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/558. It means one cannot implement XOR linked lists with strict provenance any more, which is however only of theoretical interest. Practically I am curious if anyone will show up with any code that Miri now complains about - that would be interesting data. Cc `@rust-lang/opsem`
Change the desugaring of `assert!` for better error output
In the desugaring of `assert!`, we now expand to a `match` expression instead of `if !cond {..}`.
The span of incorrect conditions will point only at the expression, and not the whole `assert!` invocation.
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> $DIR/issue-14091.rs:2:13
|
LL | assert!(1,1);
| ^ expected `bool`, found integer
```
We no longer mention the expression needing to implement the `Not` trait.
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> $DIR/issue-14091-2.rs:15:13
|
LL | assert!(x, x);
| ^ expected `bool`, found `BytePos`
```
Now `assert!(val)` desugars to:
```rust
match val {
true => {},
_ => $crate::panic::panic_2021!(),
}
```
Fix#122159.
Fix test intrinsic-raw_eq-const-bad for big-endian
The test fails on s390x and presumably other big-endian systems, due to print of raw values. To fix the tests remove the raw output values in the error note with normalize-stderr.
In the desugaring of `assert!`, we now expand to a `match` expression
instead of `if !cond {..}`.
The span of incorrect conditions will point only at the expression, and not
the whole `assert!` invocation.
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> $DIR/issue-14091.rs:2:13
|
LL | assert!(1,1);
| ^ expected `bool`, found integer
```
We no longer mention the expression needing to implement the `Not` trait.
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> $DIR/issue-14091-2.rs:15:13
|
LL | assert!(x, x);
| ^ expected `bool`, found `BytePos`
```
`assert!(val)` now desugars to:
```rust
match val {
true => {},
_ => $crate::panic::panic_2021!(),
}
```
Fix#122159.
We make some minor changes to some diagnostics to avoid span overlap on
type mismatch or inverted "expected"/"found" on type errors.
We remove some unnecessary parens from core, alloc and miri.
address review comments
Account for bare tuples and `Pin` methods in field searching logic
When looking for the field names and types of a given type, account for tuples. This allows suggestions for incorrectly nested field accesses and field name typos to trigger as intended. Previously these suggestions only worked on `ty::Adt`, including tuple structs which are no different to tuples, so they should behave the same in suggestions.
When suggesting field access which would encounter a method not found, do not suggest pinning when those methods are on `impl Pin` itself.
```
error[E0599]: no method named `get_ref` found for tuple `(BufReader<File>,)` in the current scope
--> $DIR/missing-field-access.rs:11:15
|
LL | let x = f.get_ref();
| ^^^^^^^ method not found in `(BufReader<File>,)`
|
help: one of the expressions' fields has a method of the same name
|
LL | let x = f.0.get_ref();
| ++
```
instead of
```
error[E0599]: no method named `get_ref` found for tuple `(BufReader<File>,)` in the current scope
--> $DIR/missing-field-access.rs:11:15
|
LL | let x = f.get_ref();
| ^^^^^^^ method not found in `(BufReader<File>,)`
|
help: consider pinning the expression
|
LL ~ let mut pinned = std::pin::pin!(f);
LL ~ let x = pinned.as_ref().get_ref();
|
```
Fixrust-lang/rust#144602.
Add support for `ty::Instance` path shortening in diagnostics
Make `ty::Instance` able to use `short_string` and usable in structured errors directly. Remove some ad-hoc type shortening logic.
`tests/ui/issues/`: The Issues Strike Back [3/N]
Some `tests/ui/issues/` housekeeping, to trim down number of tests directly under `tests/ui/issues/`. Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/133895.
r? ```@jieyouxu```
