Apply unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn to the standard library
This applies unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn to the standard library in preparation for updating to Rust 2024.
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/127747 (I think?) cc ``@workingjubilee``
I have been testing a variety of targets, and I feel like they are all pretty much covered. I'll continue doing some testing async, but I don't expect to catch any more.
Prepare standard library for Rust 2024 migration
This includes a variety of commits preparing the standard library for migration to Rust 2024.
The actual migration is blocked on a few things, so I wanted to get this out of the way in a relatively digestable PR.
Stabilize `const_is_char_boundary` and `const_str_split_at`.
Tracking issues: #131516, #131518
Stabilized const API:
```rs
// in `core`
impl str {
// const_is_char_boundary feature
const fn is_char_boundary(&self, index: usize) -> bool;
// const_str_split_at feature, depends on const_is_char_boundary
const fn split_at(&self, mid: usize) -> (&str, &str);
const fn split_at_mut(&mut self, mid: usize) -> (&mut str, &mut str);
const fn split_at_checked(&self, mid: usize) -> Option<(&str, &str)>;
const fn split_at_mut_checked(&mut self, mid: usize) -> Option<(&mut str, &mut str)>;
}
```
This will allow safely splitting string slices during const-eval.
Closes#131516, Closes#131518
This will need FCP.
r? libs-api
IIUC these do not use any new const language features (i.e. they are implementable manually on stable 1.83.0 using `unsafe`: [playground link](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=3679632cd1041084796241b7ac8edfbd)).
Cc ``@rust-lang/wg-const-eval`` (I don't know if I have the permissions for this ping; if not, someone else please ping wg-const-eval if it is necessary)
Remove the common prelude module
This fixes the issues described in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/136102. Primarily, this resolves some issues with how the documentation for the prelude is generated:
- It avoids showing "unstable" for macros in the prelude that are actually stable.
- Avoids duplication of some pages due to the previous lack of `doc(no_inline)`.
- Makes the different edition preludes consistent, and sets a pattern that can be used by future editions.
We may need to rearrange these modules in the future if we decide to remove anything from the prelude again. If we do, I think we should look into a different solution that avoids the documentation problems.
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/136102
`transmute` should also assume non-null pointers
Previously it only did integer-ABI things, but this way it does data pointers too. That gives more information in general to the backend, and allows slightly simplifying one of the helpers in slice iterators.
Use a trait to enforce field validity for union fields + `unsafe` fields + `unsafe<>` binder types
This PR introduces a new, internal-only trait called `BikeshedGuaranteedNoDrop`[^1] to faithfully model the field check that used to be implemented manually by `allowed_union_or_unsafe_field`.
942db6782f/compiler/rustc_hir_analysis/src/check/check.rs (L84-L115)
Copying over the doc comment from the trait:
```rust
/// Marker trait for the types that are allowed in union fields, unsafe fields,
/// and unsafe binder types.
///
/// Implemented for:
/// * `&T`, `&mut T` for all `T`,
/// * `ManuallyDrop<T>` for all `T`,
/// * tuples and arrays whose elements implement `BikeshedGuaranteedNoDrop`,
/// * or otherwise, all types that are `Copy`.
///
/// Notably, this doesn't include all trivially-destructible types for semver
/// reasons.
///
/// Bikeshed name for now.
```
As far as I am aware, there's no new behavior being guaranteed by this trait, since it operates the same as the manually implemented check. We could easily rip out this trait and go back to using the manually implemented check for union fields, however using a trait means that this code can be shared by WF for `unsafe<>` binders too. See the last commit.
The only diagnostic changes are that this now fires false-negatives for fields that are ill-formed. I don't consider that to be much of a problem though.
r? oli-obk
[^1]: Please let's not bikeshed this name lol. There's no good name for `ValidForUnsafeFieldsUnsafeBindersAndUnionFields`.
Previously it only did integer-ABI things, but this way it does data pointers too. That gives more information in general to the backend, and allows slightly simplifying one of the helpers in slice iterators.
Stabilize target_feature_11
# Stabilization report
This is an updated version of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116114, which is itself a redo of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/99767. Most of this commit and report were copied from those PRs. Thanks ```@LeSeulArtichaut``` and ```@calebzulawski!```
## Summary
Allows for safe functions to be marked with `#[target_feature]` attributes.
Functions marked with `#[target_feature]` are generally considered as unsafe functions: they are unsafe to call, cannot *generally* be assigned to safe function pointers, and don't implement the `Fn*` traits.
However, calling them from other `#[target_feature]` functions with a superset of features is safe.
```rust
// Demonstration function
#[target_feature(enable = "avx2")]
fn avx2() {}
fn foo() {
// Calling `avx2` here is unsafe, as we must ensure
// that AVX is available first.
unsafe {
avx2();
}
}
#[target_feature(enable = "avx2")]
fn bar() {
// Calling `avx2` here is safe.
avx2();
}
```
Moreover, once https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/135504 is merged, they can be converted to safe function pointers in a context in which calling them is safe:
```rust
// Demonstration function
#[target_feature(enable = "avx2")]
fn avx2() {}
fn foo() -> fn() {
// Converting `avx2` to fn() is a compilation error here.
avx2
}
#[target_feature(enable = "avx2")]
fn bar() -> fn() {
// `avx2` coerces to fn() here
avx2
}
```
See the section "Closures" below for justification of this behaviour.
## Test cases
Tests for this feature can be found in [`tests/ui/target_feature/`](f6cb952dc1/tests/ui/target-feature).
## Edge cases
### Closures
* [target-feature 1.1: should closures inherit target-feature annotations? #73631](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/73631)
Closures defined inside functions marked with #[target_feature] inherit the target features of their parent function. They can still be assigned to safe function pointers and implement the appropriate `Fn*` traits.
```rust
#[target_feature(enable = "avx2")]
fn qux() {
let my_closure = || avx2(); // this call to `avx2` is safe
let f: fn() = my_closure;
}
```
This means that in order to call a function with #[target_feature], you must guarantee that the target-feature is available while the function, any closures defined inside it, as well as any safe function pointers obtained from target-feature functions inside it, execute.
This is usually ensured because target features are assumed to never disappear, and:
- on any unsafe call to a `#[target_feature]` function, presence of the target feature is guaranteed by the programmer through the safety requirements of the unsafe call.
- on any safe call, this is guaranteed recursively by the caller.
If you work in an environment where target features can be disabled, it is your responsibility to ensure that no code inside a target feature function (including inside a closure) runs after this (until the feature is enabled again).
**Note:** this has an effect on existing code, as nowadays closures do not inherit features from the enclosing function, and thus this strengthens a safety requirement. It was originally proposed in #73631 to solve this by adding a new type of UB: “taking a target feature away from your process after having run code that uses that target feature is UB” .
This was motivated by userspace code already assuming in a few places that CPU features never disappear from a program during execution (see i.e. 2e29bdf908/crates/std_detect/src/detect/arch/x86.rs); however, concerns were raised in the context of the Linux kernel; thus, we propose to relax that requirement to "causing the set of usable features to be reduced is unsafe; when doing so, the programmer is required to ensure that no closures or safe fn pointers that use removed features are still in scope".
* [Fix #[inline(always)] on closures with target feature 1.1 #111836](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/111836)
Closures accept `#[inline(always)]`, even within functions marked with `#[target_feature]`. Since these attributes conflict, `#[inline(always)]` wins out to maintain compatibility.
### ABI concerns
* [The extern "C" ABI of SIMD vector types depends on target features #116558](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116558)
The ABI of some types can change when compiling a function with different target features. This could have introduced unsoundness with target_feature_11, but recent fixes (#133102, #132173) either make those situations invalid or make the ABI no longer dependent on features. Thus, those issues should no longer occur.
### Special functions
The `#[target_feature]` attribute is forbidden from a variety of special functions, such as main, current and future lang items (e.g. `#[start]`, `#[panic_handler]`), safe default trait implementations and safe trait methods.
This was not disallowed at the time of the first stabilization PR for target_features_11, and resulted in the following issues/PRs:
* [`#[target_feature]` is allowed on `main` #108645](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/108645)
* [`#[target_feature]` is allowed on default implementations #108646](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/108646)
* [#[target_feature] is allowed on #[panic_handler] with target_feature 1.1 #109411](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/109411)
* [Prevent using `#[target_feature]` on lang item functions #115910](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/115910)
## Documentation
* Reference: [Document the `target_feature_11` feature reference#1181](https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/pull/1181)
---
cc tracking issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/69098
cc ```@workingjubilee```
cc ```@RalfJung```
r? ```@rust-lang/lang```
Change swap_nonoverlapping from lang to library UB
The implementation of ptr::swap_nonoverlapping does not always escalate its safety contract to language UB, so it should be `check_library_ub`.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/4188
Change the issue number for `likely_unlikely` and `cold_path`
These currently point to rust-lang/rust#26179, which is nearly a decade old and has a lot of outdated discussion. Move these features to a new tracking issue specifically for the recently added API.
New tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/136873
This feature is intended to provide expensive but thorough help for
developers who have an unexpected `TypeId` value and need to determine
what type it actually is. It causes `impl Debug for TypeId` to print
the type name in addition to the opaque ID hash, and in order to do so,
adds a name field to `TypeId`. The cost of this is the increased size of
`TypeId` and the need to store type names in the binary; therefore, it
is an optional feature.
It may be enabled via `cargo -Zbuild-std -Zbuild-std-features=debug_typeid`.
(Note that `-Zbuild-std-features` disables default features which you
may wish to reenable in addition; see
<https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/reference/unstable.html#build-std-features>.)
Example usage and output:
```
fn main() {
use std::any::{Any, TypeId};
dbg!(TypeId::of::<usize>(), drop::<usize>.type_id());
}
```
```
TypeId::of::<usize>() = TypeId(0x763d199bccd319899208909ed1a860c6 = usize)
drop::<usize>.type_id() = TypeId(0xe6a34bd13f8c92dd47806da07b8cca9a = core::mem::drop<usize>)
```
Also added feature declarations for the existing `debug_refcell` feature
so it is usable from the `rust.std-features` option of `config.toml`.
This fixes the issues described in
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/136102. Primarily, this
resolves some issues with how the documentation for the prelude is
generated:
- It avoids showing "unstable" for macros in the prelude that are
actually stable.
- Avoids duplication of some pages due to the previous lack of
`doc(no_inline)`.
- Makes the different edition preludes consistent, and sets a pattern
that can be used by future editions.
We may need to rearrange these modules in the future if we decide to
remove anything from the prelude again. If we do, I think we should look
into a different solution that avoids the documentation problems.
Introduce CoercePointeeWellformed for coherence checks at typeck stage
Fix#135206
This is the first PR to introduce the "wellformedness" check for `derive(CoercePointee)`.
This patch introduces a new error code to cover all the prerequisites of the said macro. The checks that is enforced with this patch is whether the data is indeed `struct` and whether the layout is set to `repr(transparent)`.
A following series of patch will arrive later to address the following concern.
1. #135217 so that we would only admit one single coercion on one type parameter, and leave the rest for future consideration in tandem of development of other coercion rules.
1. Enforcement of data field requirements.
**An open question** is whether there is a good schema to encode the `#[pointee]` as well, so that we could also check if the `#[pointee]` type parameter is indeed `?Sized`.
``@rustbot`` label F-derive_coerce_pointee
Some miscellaneous edition-related library tweaks
Some library edition tweaks that can be done separately from upgrading the whole standard library to edition 2024 (which is blocked on getting the submodules upgraded, for example)
