Use a trait to enforce field validity for union fields + `unsafe` fields + `unsafe<>` binder types
This PR introduces a new, internal-only trait called `BikeshedGuaranteedNoDrop`[^1] to faithfully model the field check that used to be implemented manually by `allowed_union_or_unsafe_field`.
942db6782f/compiler/rustc_hir_analysis/src/check/check.rs (L84-L115)
Copying over the doc comment from the trait:
```rust
/// Marker trait for the types that are allowed in union fields, unsafe fields,
/// and unsafe binder types.
///
/// Implemented for:
/// * `&T`, `&mut T` for all `T`,
/// * `ManuallyDrop<T>` for all `T`,
/// * tuples and arrays whose elements implement `BikeshedGuaranteedNoDrop`,
/// * or otherwise, all types that are `Copy`.
///
/// Notably, this doesn't include all trivially-destructible types for semver
/// reasons.
///
/// Bikeshed name for now.
```
As far as I am aware, there's no new behavior being guaranteed by this trait, since it operates the same as the manually implemented check. We could easily rip out this trait and go back to using the manually implemented check for union fields, however using a trait means that this code can be shared by WF for `unsafe<>` binders too. See the last commit.
The only diagnostic changes are that this now fires false-negatives for fields that are ill-formed. I don't consider that to be much of a problem though.
r? oli-obk
[^1]: Please let's not bikeshed this name lol. There's no good name for `ValidForUnsafeFieldsUnsafeBindersAndUnionFields`.
Rename rustc_middle::Ty::is_unsafe_ptr to is_raw_ptr
The wording unsafe pointer is less common and not mentioned in a lot of places, instead this is usually called a "raw pointer". For the sake of uniformity, we rename this method.
This came up during the review of
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/134424.
r? `@Noratrieb`
Instead of parsing the different components of a function signature,
eagerly look for either the `where` keyword or the function body.
- Also address feedback to use `From` instead of `TryFrom` in cranelift
contract and ubcheck codegen.
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.
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:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/130516
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: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-project-goals/pull/177.
r? `@saethlin`
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: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-project-goals/pull/177.
Fix deduplication mismatches in vtables leading to upcasting unsoundness
We currently have two cases where subtleties in supertraits can trigger disagreements in the vtable layout, e.g. leading to a different vtable layout being accessed at a callsite compared to what was prepared during unsizing. Namely:
### #135315
In this example, we were not normalizing supertraits when preparing vtables. In the example,
```
trait Supertrait<T> {
fn _print_numbers(&self, mem: &[usize; 100]) {
println!("{mem:?}");
}
}
impl<T> Supertrait<T> for () {}
trait Identity {
type Selff;
}
impl<Selff> Identity for Selff {
type Selff = Selff;
}
trait Middle<T>: Supertrait<()> + Supertrait<T> {
fn say_hello(&self, _: &usize) {
println!("Hello!");
}
}
impl<T> Middle<T> for () {}
trait Trait: Middle<<() as Identity>::Selff> {}
impl Trait for () {}
fn main() {
(&() as &dyn Trait as &dyn Middle<()>).say_hello(&0);
}
```
When we prepare `dyn Trait`, we see a supertrait of `Middle<<() as Identity>::Selff>`, which itself has two supertraits `Supertrait<()>` and `Supertrait<<() as Identity>::Selff>`. These two supertraits are identical, but they are not duplicated because we were using structural equality and *not* considering normalization. This leads to a vtable layout with two trait pointers.
When we upcast to `dyn Middle<()>`, those two supertraits are now the same, leading to a vtable layout with only one trait pointer. This leads to an offset error, and we call the wrong method.
### #135316
This one is a bit more interesting, and is the bulk of the changes in this PR. It's a bit similar, except it uses binder equality instead of normalization to make the compiler get confused about two vtable layouts. In the example,
```
trait Supertrait<T> {
fn _print_numbers(&self, mem: &[usize; 100]) {
println!("{mem:?}");
}
}
impl<T> Supertrait<T> for () {}
trait Trait<T, U>: Supertrait<T> + Supertrait<U> {
fn say_hello(&self, _: &usize) {
println!("Hello!");
}
}
impl<T, U> Trait<T, U> for () {}
fn main() {
(&() as &'static dyn for<'a> Trait<&'static (), &'a ()>
as &'static dyn Trait<&'static (), &'static ()>)
.say_hello(&0);
}
```
When we prepare the vtable for `dyn for<'a> Trait<&'static (), &'a ()>`, we currently consider the PolyTraitRef of the vtable as the key for a supertrait. This leads two two supertraits -- `Supertrait<&'static ()>` and `for<'a> Supertrait<&'a ()>`.
However, we can upcast[^up] without offsetting the vtable from `dyn for<'a> Trait<&'static (), &'a ()>` to `dyn Trait<&'static (), &'static ()>`. This is just instantiating the principal trait ref for a specific `'a = 'static`. However, when considering those supertraits, we now have only one distinct supertrait -- `Supertrait<&'static ()>` (which is deduplicated since there are two supertraits with the same substitutions). This leads to similar offsetting issues, leading to the wrong method being called.
[^up]: I say upcast but this is a cast that is allowed on stable, since it's not changing the vtable at all, just instantiating the binder of the principal trait ref for some lifetime.
The solution here is to recognize that a vtable isn't really meaningfully higher ranked, and to just treat a vtable as corresponding to a `TraitRef` so we can do this deduplication more faithfully. That is to say, the vtable for `dyn for<'a> Tr<'a>` and `dyn Tr<'x>` are always identical, since they both would correspond to a set of free regions on an impl... Do note that `Tr<for<'a> fn(&'a ())>` and `Tr<fn(&'static ())>` are still distinct.
----
There's a bit more that can be cleaned up. In codegen, we can stop using `PolyExistentialTraitRef` basically everywhere. We can also fix SMIR to stop storing `PolyExistentialTraitRef` in its vtable allocations.
As for testing, it's difficult to actually turn this into something that can be tested with `rustc_dump_vtable`, since having multiple supertraits that are identical is a recipe for ambiguity errors. Maybe someone else is more creative with getting that attr to work, since the tests I added being run-pass tests is a bit unsatisfying. Miri also doesn't help here, since it doesn't really generate vtables that are offset by an index in the same way as codegen.
r? `@lcnr` for the vibe check? Or reassign, idk. Maybe let's talk about whether this makes sense.
<sup>(I guess an alternative would also be to not do any deduplication of vtable supertraits (or only a really conservative subset) rather than trying to normalize and deduplicate more faithfully here. Not sure if that works and is sufficient tho.)</sup>
cc `@steffahn` -- ty for the minimizations
cc `@WaffleLapkin` -- since you're overseeing the feature stabilization :3
Fixes#135315Fixes#135316
