Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #107159 (rand use getrandom for freebsd (available since 12.x))
- #116859 (Make `ty::print::Printer` take `&mut self` instead of `self`)
- #117046 (return unfixed len if pat has reported error)
- #117070 (rustdoc: wrap Type with Box instead of Generics)
- #117074 (Remove smir from triage and add me to stablemir)
- #117086 (Update .mailmap to promote my livename)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Make `ty::print::Printer` take `&mut self` instead of `self`
based on #116815
This simplifies the code by removing all the `self` assignments and
makes the flow of data clearer - always into the printer.
Especially in v0 mangling, which already used `&mut self` in some
places, it gets a lot more uniform.
report `unused_import` for empty reexports even it is pub
Fixes#116032
An easy fix. r? `@petrochenkov`
(Discovered this issue while reviewing #115993.)
This simplifies the code by removing all the `self` assignments and
makes the flow of data clearer - always into the printer.
Especially in v0 mangling, which already used `&mut self` in some
places, it gets a lot more uniform.
This new description reflects the changes made in this PR, and should hopefully
be more useful to non-coverage developers who need to care about coverage
statements.
Even though expression details are now stored in the info structure, we still
need to inject `ExpressionUsed` statements into MIR, because if one is missing
during codegen then we know that it was optimized out and we can remap all of
its associated code regions to zero.
Previously, mappings were attached to individual coverage statements in MIR.
That necessitated special handling in MIR optimizations to avoid deleting those
statements, since otherwise codegen would be unable to reassemble the original
list of mappings.
With this change, a function's list of mappings is now attached to its MIR
body, and survives intact even if individual statements are deleted by
optimizations.
Coverage codegen can now allocate arrays based on the number of
counters/expressions originally used by the instrumentor.
The existing query that inspects coverage statements is still used for
determining the number of counters passed to `llvm.instrprof.increment`. If
some high-numbered counters were removed by MIR optimizations, the instrumented
binary can potentially use less memory and disk space at runtime.
This allows coverage information to be attached to the function as a whole when
appropriate, instead of being smuggled through coverage statements in the
function's basic blocks.
As an example, this patch moves the `function_source_hash` value out of
individual `CoverageKind::Counter` statements and into the per-function info.
When synthesizing unused functions for coverage purposes, the absence of this
info is taken to indicate that a function was not eligible for coverage and
should not be synthesized.
don't UB on dangling ptr deref, instead check inbounds on projections
This implements https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/pull/1387 in Miri. See that PR for what the change is about.
Detecting dangling references in `let x = &...;` is now done by validity checking only, so some tests need to have validity checking enabled. There is no longer inherently a "nodangle" check in evaluating the expression `&*ptr` (aside from the aliasing model).
r? `@oli-obk`
Based on:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/pull/1387
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/115524
interpret: clean up AllocBytes
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/2836
Nothing has moved here in half a year, so let's just remove these unused stubs -- they need a proper re-design anyway.
r? `@oli-obk`
Generalize small dominators optimization
* Use small dominators optimization from 640ede7b0a1840415cb6ec881c2210302bfeba18 more generally.
* Merge `DefLocation` and `LocationExtended` since they serve the same purpose.
coverage: Allow each coverage statement to have multiple code regions
The original implementation of coverage instrumentation was built around the assumption that a coverage counter/expression would be associated with *up to one* code region. When it was discovered that *multiple* regions would sometimes need to share a counter, a workaround was found: for the remaining regions, the instrumentor would create a fresh expression that adds zero to the existing counter/expression.
That got the job done, but resulted in some awkward code, and produces unnecessarily complicated coverage maps in the final binary.
---
This PR removes that tension by changing `StatementKind::Coverage`'s code region field from `Option<CodeRegion>` to `Vec<CodeRegion>`.
The changes on the codegen side are fairly straightforward. As long as each `CoverageKind::Counter` only injects one `llvm.instrprof.increment`, the rest of coverage codegen is happy to handle multiple regions mapped to the same counter/expression, with only minor option-to-vec adjustments.
On the instrumentor/mir-transform side, we can get rid of the code that creates extra (x + 0) expressions. Instead we gather all of the code regions associated with a single BCB, and inject them all into one coverage statement.
---
There are several patches here but they can be divided in to three phases:
- Preparatory work
- Actually switching over to multiple regions per coverage statement
- Cleaning up
So viewing the patches individually may be easier.
When these methods were originally written, I wasn't aware that
`newtype_index!` already supports addition with ordinary numbers, without
needing to unwrap and re-wrap.
Cleanup number handling in match exhaustiveness
Doing a little bit of cleanup; handling number constants was somewhat messy. In particular, this:
- evals float consts once instead of repetitively
- reduces `Constructor` from 88 bytes to 56 (`mir::Const` is big!)
The `fast_try_eval_bits` function was mostly constructed from inlining existing code but I don't fully understand it; I don't follow how consts work and are evaluated very well.
Assorted improvements for `rustc_middle::mir::traversal`
r? `@cjgillot`
I'm not _entirely_ sure about all changes, although I do like all of them. If you'd like I can drop some commits. Best reviewed on a commit-by-commit basis, I think, since they are fairly isolated.
