Fix miscompilation of inline assembly with outputs in cases where we emit an invoke instead of call instruction.
We ran into this bug where rustc would segfault while trying to compile certain uses of inline assembly.
Here is a simple repro that demonstrates the issue:
```rust
#![feature(asm_unwind)]
fn main() {
let _x = String::from("string here just cause we need something with a non-trivial drop");
let foo: u64;
unsafe {
std::arch::asm!(
"mov {}, 1",
out(reg) foo,
options(may_unwind)
);
}
println!("{}", foo);
}
```
([playground link](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=nightly&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=7d6641e83370d2536a07234aca2498ff))
But crucially `feature(asm_unwind)` is not actually needed and this can be triggered on stable as a result of the way async functions/generators are handled in the compiler. e.g.:
```rust
extern crate futures; // 0.3.21
async fn bar() {
let foo: u64;
unsafe {
std::arch::asm!(
"mov {}, 1",
out(reg) foo,
);
}
println!("{}", foo);
}
fn main() {
futures::executor::block_on(bar());
}
```
([playground link](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=1c7781c34dd4a3e80ae4bd936a0c82fc))
An example of the incorrect LLVM generated:
```llvm
bb1: ; preds = %start
%1 = invoke i64 asm sideeffect alignstack inteldialect unwind "mov ${0:q}, 1", "=&r,~{dirflag},~{fpsr},~{flags},~{memory}"()
to label %bb2 unwind label %cleanup, !srcloc !9
store i64 %1, i64* %foo, align 8
bb2:
[...snip...]
```
The store should not be placed after the asm invoke but rather should be in the normal control flow basic block (`bb2` in this case).
[Here](https://gist.github.com/luqmana/be1af5b64d2cda5a533e3e23a7830b44) is a writeup of the investigation that lead to finding this.
[`let_chains`] Forbid `let` inside parentheses
Parenthesizes are mostly a no-op in let chains, in other words, they are mostly ignored.
```rust
let opt = Some(Some(1i32));
if (let Some(a) = opt && (let Some(b) = a)) && b == 1 {
println!("`b` is declared inside but used outside");
}
```
As seen above, such behavior can lead to confusion.
A proper fix or nested encapsulation would probably require research, time and a modified MIR graph so in this PR I simply denied any `let` inside parentheses. Non-let stuff are still allowed.
```rust
fn main() {
let fun = || true;
if let true = (true && fun()) && (true) {
println!("Allowed");
}
}
```
It is worth noting that `let ...` is not an expression and the RFC did not mention this specific situation.
cc `@matthewjasper`
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #95743 (Update binary_search example to instead redirect to partition_point)
- #95771 (Update linker-plugin-lto.md to 1.60)
- #95861 (Note that CI tests Windows 10)
- #95875 (bootstrap: show available paths help text for aliased subcommands)
- #95876 (Add a note for unsatisfied `~const Drop` bounds)
- #95907 (address fixme for diagnostic variable name)
- #95917 (thin_box test: import from std, not alloc)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Only suggest removing semicolon when expression is compatible with `impl Trait`
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/54771#issuecomment-476423690
> It still needs checking that the last statement's expr can actually conform to the trait, but the naïve behavior is there.
Only suggest removing a semicolon when the type behind the semicolon actually implements the trait in an RPIT `-> impl Trait`. Also upgrade the label that suggests removing the semicolon to a suggestion (should it be verbose?).
cc #54771
When a `macro_rules! foo { ... }` invocation is compiled the name used
is `foo`, not `macro_rules!`. This is different to all other macro
invocations, and confused me when I was inserted debugging println
statements for macro evaluation.
This commit changes it to `macro_rules` (or just `macro`), which is what
I expected. There are no externally visible changes.
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #95566 (Avoid duplication of doc comments in `std::char` constants and functions)
- #95784 (Suggest replacing `typeof(...)` with an actual type)
- #95807 (Suggest adding a local for vector to fix borrowck errors)
- #95849 (Check for git submodules in non-git source tree.)
- #95852 (Fix missing space in lossy provenance cast lint)
- #95857 (Allow multiple derefs to be splitted in deref_separator)
- #95868 (rustdoc: Reduce allocations in a `html::markdown` function)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Allow multiple derefs to be splitted in deref_separator
Previously in #95649 only a single deref within projection was supported and multiple derefs caused a bunch of issues, this PR fixes those issues.
```@oli-obk``` helped a ton again ❤️
Suggest replacing `typeof(...)` with an actual type
This PR adds suggestion to replace `typeof(...)` with an actual type of `...`, for example in case of `typeof(1)` we suggest replacing it with `i32`.
If the expression
1. Is not const (`{ let a = 1; let _: typeof(a); }`)
2. Can't be found (`let _: typeof(this_variable_does_not_exist)`)
3. Or has non-suggestable type (closure, generator, error, etc)
we don't suggest anything.
The 1 one is sad, but it's not clear how to support non-consts expressions for `typeof`.
_This PR is inspired by [this tweet]._
[this tweet]: https://twitter.com/compiler_errors/status/1511945354752638976
Make def names and HIR names consistent.
The name in the `DefKey` is interned to create the `DefId`, so it does not
require any query to access. This can be leveraged to avoid a few useless
HIR accesses for names.
~In order to achieve that, generic parameters created from universal
impl-trait are given the pretty-printed ast as a name, instead of
`{{opaque}}`.~
~Drive-by: the `TyCtxt::opt_item_name` used a dummy span for non-local
definitions. We have access to `def_ident_span`, so we use it.~
We may sometimes emit an `invoke` instead of a `call` for inline
assembly during the MIR -> LLVM IR lowering. But we failed to update
the IR builder's current basic block before writing the results to the
outputs. This would result in invalid IR because the basic block would
end in a `store` instruction, which isn't a valid terminator.
