See through aggregates in GVN
This PR is extracted from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/111344
The first 2 commit are cleanups to avoid repeated work. I propose to stop removing useless assignments as part of this pass, and let a later `SimplifyLocals` do it. This makes tests easier to read (among others).
The next 3 commits add a constant folding mechanism to the GVN pass, presented in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116012. ~This pass is designed to only use global allocations, to avoid any risk of accidental modification of the stored state.~
The following commits implement opportunistic simplifications, in particular:
- projections of aggregates: `MyStruct { x: a }.x` gets replaced by `a`, works with enums too;
- projections of arrays: `[a, b][0]` becomes `a`;
- projections of repeat expressions: `[a; N][x]` becomes `a`;
- transform arrays of equal operands into a repeat rvalue.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/3090
r? `@oli-obk`
Do not check for impossible predicates in const-prop lint.
The enclosing query already checks for them, and replaces the body with a single `unreachable` if they are indeed impossible.
rename mir::Constant -> mir::ConstOperand, mir::ConstKind -> mir::Const
Also, be more consistent with the `to/eval_bits` methods... we had some that take a type and some that take a size, and then sometimes the one that takes a type is called `bits_for_ty`.
Turns out that `ty::Const`/`mir::ConstKind` carry their type with them, so we don't need to even pass the type to those `eval_bits` functions at all.
However this is not properly consistent yet: in `ty` we have most of the methods on `ty::Const`, but in `mir` we have them on `mir::ConstKind`. And indeed those two types are the ones that correspond to each other. So `mir::ConstantKind` should actually be renamed to `mir::Const`. But what to do with `mir::Constant`? It carries around a span, that's really more like a constant operand that appears as a MIR operand... it's more suited for `syntax.rs` than `consts.rs`, but the bigger question is, which name should it get if we want to align the `mir` and `ty` types? `ConstOperand`? `ConstOp`? `Literal`? It's not a literal but it has a field called `literal` so it would at least be consistently wrong-ish...
``@oli-obk`` any ideas?
Make module inner and function run_analysis_to_runtime_passes in
rustc_mir_transform public to allow re-implementing the query from the
rust compiler interface.
Make `unconditional_recursion` warning detect recursive drops
Closes#55388
Also closes#50049 unless we want to keep it for the second example which this PR does not solve, but I think it is better to track that work in #57965.
r? `@oli-obk` since you are the mentor for #55388
Unresolved questions:
- [x] There are two false positives that must be fixed before merging (see diff). I suspect the best way to solve them is to perform analysis after drop elaboration instead of before, as now, but I have not explored that any further yet. Could that be an option? **Answer:** Yes, that solved the problem.
`@rustbot` label +T-compiler +C-enhancement +A-lint
Previously, when borrowck failed it would taint all promoteds within the MIR
body. An attempt to evaluated the promoteds would subsequently fail with
spurious "note: erroneous constant used". For example:
```console
...
note: erroneous constant used
--> tests/ui/borrowck/tainted-promoteds.rs:7:9
|
7 | a = &0 * &1 * &2 * &3;
| ^^
note: erroneous constant used
--> tests/ui/borrowck/tainted-promoteds.rs:7:14
|
7 | a = &0 * &1 * &2 * &3;
| ^^
note: erroneous constant used
--> tests/ui/borrowck/tainted-promoteds.rs:7:19
|
7 | a = &0 * &1 * &2 * &3;
| ^^
note: erroneous constant used
--> tests/ui/borrowck/tainted-promoteds.rs:7:24
|
7 | a = &0 * &1 * &2 * &3;
| ^^
```
Borrowck failure doesn't indicate that there is anything wrong with
promoteds. Leave them untainted.
Evaluate place expression in `PlaceMention`
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/102256 introduces a `PlaceMention(place)` MIR statement which keep trace of `let _ = place` statements from surface rust, but without semantics.
This PR proposes to change the behaviour of `let _ =` patterns with respect to the borrow-checker to verify that the bound place is live.
Specifically, consider this code:
```rust
let _ = {
let a = 5;
&a
};
```
This passes borrowck without error on stable. Meanwhile, replacing `_` by `_: _` or `_p` errors with "error[E0597]: `a` does not live long enough", [see playground](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=c448d25a7c205dc95a0967fe96bccce8).
This PR *does not* change how `_` patterns behave with respect to initializedness: it remains ok to bind a moved-from place to `_`.
The relevant test is `tests/ui/borrowck/let_underscore_temporary.rs`. Crater check found no regression.
For consistency, this PR changes miri to evaluate the place found in `PlaceMention`, and report eventual dangling pointers found within it.
r? `@RalfJung`
