bjoernager/rust
bjoernager/rust
1
Fork 0
Code Activity

move UnsafeCell-in-const check from interning to validation

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Ralf Jung 2020-10-24 20:49:17 +02:00
parent d0a23e613d
commit 0e014be359
7 changed files with 74 additions and 53 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

6
compiler/rustc_mir/src/interpret/intern.rs
View file

@ -129,9 +129,7 @@ fn intern_shallow<'rt, 'mir, 'tcx, M: CompileTimeMachine<'mir, 'tcx>>(
// See const_eval::machine::MemoryExtra::can_access_statics for why
// immutability is so important.
// There are no sensible checks we can do here; grep for `mutable_memory_in_const` to
// find the checks we are doing elsewhere to avoid even getting here for memory
// that "wants" to be mutable.
// Validation will ensure that there is no `UnsafeCell` on an immutable allocation.
alloc.mutability = Mutability::Not;
};
// link the alloc id to the actual allocation
@ -176,7 +174,7 @@ impl<'rt, 'mir, 'tcx: 'mir, M: CompileTimeMachine<'mir, 'tcx>> ValueVisitor<'mir
// they caused. It also helps us to find cases where const-checking
// failed to prevent an `UnsafeCell` (but as `ignore_interior_mut_in_const`
// shows that part is not airtight).
mutable_memory_in_const(self.ecx.tcx, "`UnsafeCell`");
//mutable_memory_in_const(self.ecx.tcx, "`UnsafeCell`");
}
// We are crossing over an `UnsafeCell`, we can mutate again. This means that
// References we encounter inside here are interned as pointing to mutable