interpret: make read-pointer-as-bytes a CTFE-only error with extra information
Next step in the reaction to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/99923. Also teaches Miri to implicitly strip provenance in more situations when transmuting pointers to integers, which fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/2456.
Pointer-to-int transmutation during CTFE now produces a message like this:
```
= help: this code performed an operation that depends on the underlying bytes representing a pointer
= help: the absolute address of a pointer is not known at compile-time, so such operations are not supported
```
r? ``@oli-obk``
no alignment check during interning
This should fix https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/101034
r? `@oli-obk`
Unfortunately we don't have a self-contained testcase for this problem. I am not sure how it can be triggered...
Diagnostics migr const eval
This PR should eventually contain all diagnostic migrations for the `rustc_const_eval` crate.
r? `@davidtwco`
`@rustbot` label +A-translation
Let's avoid using two different terms for the same thing -- let's just call it "provenance" everywhere.
In Miri, provenance consists of an AllocId and an SbTag (Stacked Borrows tag), which made this even more confusing.
Use constant eval to do strict mem::uninit/zeroed validity checks
I'm not sure about the code organisation here, I just dumped the check in rustc_const_eval at the root. Not hard to move it elsewhere, in any case.
Also, this means cranelift codegen intrinsics lose the strict checks, since they don't seem to depend on rustc_const_eval, and I didn't see a point in keeping around two copies.
I also left comments in the is_zero_valid methods about "uhhh help how do i do this", those apply to both methods equally.
Also rustc_codegen_ssa now depends on rustc_const_eval... is this okay?
Pinging `@RalfJung` since you were the one who mentioned this to me, so I'm assuming you're interested.
Haven't had a chance to run full tests on this since it's really warm, and it's 1AM, I'll check out any failures/comments in the morning :)
interpret/visitor: support visiting with a PlaceTy
Finally we can visit a `PlaceTy` in a way that will only do `force_allocation` when needed ti visit a field. :)
r? `@oli-obk`
There are several indications that we should not ZST as a ScalarInt:
- We had two ways to have ZST valtrees, either an empty `Branch` or a `Leaf` with a ZST in it.
`ValTree::zst()` used the former, but the latter could possibly arise as well.
- Likewise, the interpreter had `Immediate::Uninit` and `Immediate::Scalar(Scalar::ZST)`.
- LLVM codegen already had to special-case ZST ScalarInt.
So instead add new ZST variants to those types that did not have other variants
which could be used for this purpose.
Operand::Uninit is an *allocated* operand that is fully uninitialized.
This lets us lazily allocate the actual backing store of *all* locals (no matter their ABI).
I also reordered things in pop_stack_frame at the same time.
I should probably have made that a separate commit...
interpret: add From<&MplaceTy> for PlaceTy
We have a similar instance for `&MPlaceTy` to `OpTy`. Also add the same for `&mut`.
This avoids having to write `&(*place).into()`, which we have a few times here and at least twice in Miri (and it comes up again in my current patch).
r? ```@oli-obk```
The current code is a basis for `is_const_fn_raw`, and `impl_constness`
is no longer a valid name, which is previously used for determining the
constness of impls, and not items in general.
