Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #117111 (Remove support for alias `-Z instrument-coverage`)
- #117141 (Require target features to match exactly during inlining)
- #117152 (Fix unwrap suggestion for async fn)
- #117154 (implement C ABI lowering for CSKY)
- #117159 (Work around the fact that `check_mod_type_wf` may spuriously return `ErrorGuaranteed`)
- #117163 (compiletest: Display compilation errors in mir-opt tests)
- #117173 (Make `Iterator` a lang item)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Work around the fact that `check_mod_type_wf` may spuriously return `ErrorGuaranteed`
Even if that error is only emitted by `check_mod_item_types`.
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/117153
A cleaner refactoring would merge/chain these queries in ways that ensure we only actually get an `ErrorGuaranteed` if there was an error emitted.
Fix unwrap suggestion for async fn
Use `body_fn_sig` to get the expected return type of the function instead of `ret_coercion` in `FnCtxt`. This avoids accessing the `ret_coercion` when it's already mutably borrowed (e.g. when checking `return` expressions).
Fixes#117144
r? `@chenyukang`
Require target features to match exactly during inlining
In general it is not correct to inline a callee with a target features
that are subset of the callee. Require target features to match exactly
during inlining.
The exact match could be potentially relaxed, but this would require
identifying specific feature that are allowed to differ, those that need
to match, and those that can be present in caller but not in callee.
This resolves MIR part of #116573. For other concerns with respect to
the previous implementation also see areInlineCompatible in LLVM.
Remove support for alias `-Z instrument-coverage`
This flag was stabilized in rustc 1.60.0 (2022-04-07) as `-C instrument-coverage`, but the old unstable flag was kept around (with a warning) as an alias to ease migration.
It should now be reasonable to remove the somewhat tricky code that implemented that alias.
Fixes#116980.
Merge `impl_wf_inference` (`check_mod_impl_wf`) check into coherence checking
Problem here is that we call `collect_impl_trait_in_trait_types` when checking `check_mod_impl_wf` which is performed before coherence. Due to the `tcx.sess.track_errors`, since we end up reporting an error, we never actually proceed to coherence checking, where we would be emitting a more useful impl overlap error.
This change means that we may report more errors in some cases, but can at least proceed far enough to leave a useful message for overlapping traits with RPITITs in them.
Fixes#116982
r? types
Remove fold code and add `Const::internal()` to StableMIR
We are not planning to support user generated constant in the foreseeable future, so we are cleaning up the fold logic and user created type for now. Users should use `Instance::resolve` in order to trigger monomorphization.
The Instance::resolve was however incomplete, since we weren't handling internalizing constants yet. Thus, I added that.
I decided to keep the `Const` fields private in case we decide to translate them lazily.
We are not planning to support user generated constant in the
foreseeable future, so we are removing the Fold logic for now in
favor of the Instance::resolve logic.
The Instance::resolve was however incomplete, since we weren't handling
internalizing constants yet. Thus, I added that.
I decided to keep the Const fields private in case we decide to
translate them lazily.
In general it is not correct to inline a callee with a target features
that are subset of the callee. Require target features to match exactly
during inlining.
The exact match could be potentially relaxed, but this would require
identifying specific feature that are allowed to differ, those that need
to match, and those that can be present in caller but not in callee.
This resolves MIR part of #116573. For other concerns with respect to
the previous implementation also see areInlineCompatible in LLVM.
Add method to convert internal to stable constructs
This is an alternative implementation to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116999. I believe we can still improve the logic a bit here, but I wanted to see which direction we should go first.
In this implementation, the API is simpler and we keep Tables somewhat private. The definition is still public though, since we have to expose the Stable trait. However, there's a cost of keeping another thread-local and using `Rc`, but I'm hoping it will be a small cost.
r? ``@oli-obk``
r? ``@spastorino``
Suggest unwrap/expect for let binding type mismatch
Found it when investigating https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116738
I'm not sure whether it's a good style to suggest `unwrap`, seems it's may helpful for newcomers.
#116738 needs another fix to improve it.
Introduce `-C instrument-coverage=branch` to gate branch coverage
This was extracted from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/115061 and can land independently from other coverage related work.
The flag is unused for now, but is added in advance of adding branch coverage support.
It is an unstable, nightly only flag that needs to be used in combination with `-Zunstable-options`, like so: `-Zunstable-options -C instrument-coverage=branch`.
The goal is to develop branch coverage as an unstable opt-in feature first, before it matures and can be turned on by default.
Validate `feature` and `since` values inside `#[stable(…)]`
Previously the string passed to `#[unstable(feature = "...")]` would be validated as an identifier, but not `#[stable(feature = "...")]`. In the standard library there were `stable` attributes containing the empty string, and kebab-case string, neither of which should be allowed.
Pre-existing validation of `unstable`:
```rust
// src/lib.rs
#![allow(internal_features)]
#![feature(staged_api)]
#![unstable(feature = "kebab-case", issue = "none")]
#[unstable(feature = "kebab-case", issue = "none")]
pub struct Struct;
```
```console
error[E0546]: 'feature' is not an identifier
--> src/lib.rs:5:1
|
5 | #![unstable(feature = "kebab-case", issue = "none")]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```
For an `unstable` attribute, the need for an identifier is obvious because the downstream code needs to write a `#![feature(...)]` attribute containing that identifier. `#![feature(kebab-case)]` is not valid syntax and `#![feature(kebab_case)]` would not work if that is not the name of the feature.
Having a valid identifier even in `stable` is less essential but still useful because it allows for informative diagnostic about the stabilization of a feature. Compare:
```rust
// src/lib.rs
#![allow(internal_features)]
#![feature(staged_api)]
#![stable(feature = "kebab-case", since = "1.0.0")]
#[stable(feature = "kebab-case", since = "1.0.0")]
pub struct Struct;
```
```rust
// src/main.rs
#![feature(kebab_case)]
use repro::Struct;
fn main() {}
```
```console
error[E0635]: unknown feature `kebab_case`
--> src/main.rs:3:12
|
3 | #![feature(kebab_case)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^
```
vs the situation if we correctly use `feature = "snake_case"` and `#![feature(snake_case)]`, as enforced by this PR:
```console
warning: the feature `snake_case` has been stable since 1.0.0 and no longer requires an attribute to enable
--> src/main.rs:3:12
|
3 | #![feature(snake_case)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: `#[warn(stable_features)]` on by default
```
Handle `ReErased` in responses in new solver
There are legitimate cases in the compiler where we return `ReErased` for lifetimes that are uncaptured in the hidden type of an opaque. For example, in the test committed below, we ignore ignore the bivariant lifetimes of an opaque when it's inferred as the hidden type of another opaque. This may result in a `type_of(Opaque)` call returning a type that references `ReErased`. Let's handle this gracefully in the new solver.
Also added a `rustc_hidden_type_of_opaques` attr to print hidden types. This seems useful for opaques.
r? lcnr
