Migrate `link-cfg` and `rustdoc-default-output` `run-make` tests to rmake
Part of #121876 and the associated [Google Summer of Code project](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/05/01/gsoc-2024-selected-projects.html).
try-job: aarch64-apple
try-job: x86_64-msvc
try-job: x86_64-mingw
try-job: x86_64-gnu-llvm-18
try-job: i686-msvc
Migrate `cross-lang-lto` `run-make` test to rmake
Part of #121876 and the associated [Google Summer of Code project](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/05/01/gsoc-2024-selected-projects.html).
Please try:
try-job: x86_64-msvc
try-job: i686-mingw
try-job: x86_64-mingw
try-job: armhf-gnu
try-job: test-various
try-job: aarch64-apple
try-job: x86_64-gnu-llvm-18
Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #126818 (Better handle suggestions for the already present code and fix some suggestions)
- #128436 (Update sysinfo version to 0.31.2)
- #128453 (raw_eq: using it on bytes with provenance is not UB (outside const-eval))
- #128491 ([`macro_metavar_expr_concat`] Dogfooding)
- #128494 (MIR required_consts, mentioned_items: ensure we do not forget to fill these lists)
- #128521 (rustdoc: Remove dead opaque_tys rendering logic)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
raw_eq: using it on bytes with provenance is not UB (outside const-eval)
The current behavior of raw_eq violates provenance monotonicity. See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/124921 for an explanation of provenance monotonicity. It is violated in raw_eq because comparing bytes without provenance is well-defined, but adding provenance makes the operation UB.
So remove the no-provenance requirement from raw_eq. However, the requirement stays in-place for compile-time invocations of raw_eq, that indeed cannot deal with provenance.
Cc `@rust-lang/opsem`
Better handle suggestions for the already present code and fix some suggestions
When a suggestion part is for code that is already present, skip it. If all the suggestion parts for a suggestion are for code that is already there, do not emit the suggestion.
Fix two suggestions that treat `span_suggestion` as if it were `span_help`.
```
error[E0790]: cannot call associated function on trait without specifying the corresponding `impl` type
--> $DIR/E0283.rs:30:21
|
LL | fn create() -> u32;
| ------------------- `Coroutine::create` defined here
...
LL | let cont: u32 = Coroutine::create();
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ cannot call associated function of trait
|
help: use a fully-qualified path to a specific available implementation
|
LL | let cont: u32 = <Impl as Coroutine>::create();
| ++++++++ +
LL | let cont: u32 = <AnotherImpl as Coroutine>::create();
| +++++++++++++++ +
```
When a suggestion part is for already present code, do not highlight it. If after that there are no highlights left, do not show the suggestion at all.
Fix clippy lint suggestion incorrectly treated as `span_help`.
interpret: on a signed deref check, mention the right pointer in the error
When a negative offset (like `ptr.offset(-10)`) goes out-of-bounds, we currently show an error saying that we expect the *resulting* pointer to be inbounds for 10 bytes. That's confusing, so this PR makes it so that instead we say that we expect the *original* pointer `ptr` to have 10 bytes *to the left*.
I also realized I can simplify the pointer arithmetic logic and handling of "staying inbounds of a target `usize`" quite a bit; the second commit does that.
More unsafe attr verification
This code denies unsafe on attributes such as `#[test]` and `#[ignore]`, while also changing the `MetaItem` parsing so `unsafe` in args like `#[allow(unsafe(dead_code))]` is not accidentally allowed.
Tracking:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123757
Finish blessing `coverage/mcdc` tests after LLVM 19 upgrade
Context: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/127513#issuecomment-2260887708
These changes aren't needed for Rust CI, because after the LLVM 19 upgrade we have no jobs that run these tests in `coverage-run` mode against LLVM 18. But they might help external builds.
The longer-term plan is to completely drop (unstable) MC/DC support on LLVM 18, as part of getting it working on LLVM 19 in #126733.
cc `@cuviper`
Emit an error if `#[optimize]` is applied to an incompatible item
#54882
The RFC specifies that this should emit a lint. I used the same allow logic as the `coverage` attribute (also allowing modules and impl blocks) - this should possibly be changed depending on if it's decided to allow 'propogation' of the attribute.
Migrate `symbol-visibility` `run-make` test to rmake
Part of #121876 and the associated [Google Summer of Code project](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/05/01/gsoc-2024-selected-projects.html).
Pretty scary!
- The expected number of symbols on each check has been changed slightly to reflect the differences between `llvm_readobj` and `nm`, as I think the former will print hidden symbols once and visible symbols twice, while the latter will only print visible symbols.
- The original test ran the same exact checks on `cdylib` twice, for seemingly no reason. I have removed it.
- This may be possible to optimize some more? `llvm_readobj` could get called only once for each library type, and the regex could avoid being created repeatedly. I am not sure if these kinds of considerations are important for a `run-make` test.
Demands a Windows try-job.
try-job: x86_64-mingw
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #123813 (Add `REDUNDANT_IMPORTS` lint for new redundant import detection)
- #126697 ([RFC] mbe: consider the `_` in 2024 an expression)
- #127159 (match lowering: Hide `Candidate` from outside the lowering algorithm)
- #128244 (Peel off explicit (or implicit) deref before suggesting clone on move error in borrowck, remove some hacks)
- #128431 (Add myself as VxWorks target maintainer for reference)
- #128438 (Add special-case for [T, 0] in dropck_outlives)
- #128457 (Fix docs for OnceLock::get_mut_or_init)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
derive(SmartPointer): require pointee to be maybe sized
cc ``@Darksonn``
So `#[pointee]` has to be `?Sized` in order for deriving `SmartPointer` to be meaningful.
cc ``@compiler-errors`` for suggestions in #127681
Properly mark loop as diverging if it has no breaks
Due to specifics about the desugaring of the `.await` operator, HIR typeck doesn't recognize that `.await`ing an `impl Future<Output = !>` will diverge in the same way as calling a `fn() -> !`.
This is because the await operator desugars to approximately:
```rust
loop {
match future.poll(...) {
Poll::Ready(x) => break x,
Poll::Pending => {}
}
}
```
We know that the value of `x` is `!`, however since `break` is a coercion site, we coerce `!` to some `?0` (the type of the loop expression). Then since the type of the `loop {...}` expression is `?0`, we will not detect the loop as diverging like we do with other expressions that evaluate to `!`:
0b5eb7ba7b/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/expr.rs (L240-L243)
We can technically fix this in two ways:
1. Make coercion of loop exprs more eagerly result in a type of `!` when the only break expressions have type `!`.
2. Make loops understand that all of that if they have only diverging break values, then the loop diverges as well.
(1.) likely has negative effects on inference, and seems like a weird special case to drill into coercion. However, it turns out that (2.) is very easy to implement, we already record whether a loop has any break expressions, and when we do so, we actually skip over any break expressions with diverging values!:
0b5eb7ba7b/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/expr.rs (L713-L716)
Thus, we can consider the loop as diverging if we see that it has no breaks, which is the change implemented in this PR.
This is not usually a problem in regular code for two reasons:
1. In regular code, we already mark `break diverging()` as unreachable if `diverging()` is unreachable. We don't do this for `.await`, since we suppress unreachable errors within `.await` (#64930). Un-suppressing this code will result in spurious unreachable expression errors pointing to internal await machinery.
3. In loops that truly have no breaks (e.g. `loop {}`), we already evaluate the type of the loop to `!`, so this special case is kinda moot. This only affects loops that have `break`s with values of type `!`.
Thus, this seems like a change that may affect more code than just `.await`, but it likely does not in meaningful ways; if it does, it's certainly correct to apply.
Fixes#128434
Peel off explicit (or implicit) deref before suggesting clone on move error in borrowck, remove some hacks
Also remove a heck of a lot of weird hacks in `suggest_cloning` that I don't think we should have around.
I know this regresses tests, but I don't believe most of these suggestions were accurate, b/c:
1. They either produced type errors (e.g. turning `&x` into `x.clone()`)
2. They don't fix the issue
3. They fix the issue ostensibly, but introduce logic errors (e.g. cloning a `&mut Option<T>` to then `Option::take` out...)
Most of the suggestions are still wrong, but they're not particularly *less* wrong IMO.
Stacked on top of #128241, which is an "obviously worth landing" subset of this PR.
r? estebank
