Skip to content

Avoid "no field" error and ICE on recovered ADT variant #127575

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 11, 2024

Conversation

chenyukang
Copy link
Member

Fixes #126744
Fixes #126344, a more general fix compared with #127426

r? @oli-obk

From @compiler-errors 's comment #127502 (comment)
Seems most of the ADTs don't have taint, so maybe it's not proper to change TyCtxt::type_of query.

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Jul 10, 2024
@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Jul 10, 2024

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jul 10, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 10, 2024

⌛ Trying commit 17651e3 with merge 83d5b81...

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jul 10, 2024
…ice, r=<try>

Avoid no field error and ice no recovered struct variant

Fixes rust-lang#126744
Fixes rust-lang#126344, a more general fix compared with rust-lang#127426

r? `@oli-obk`

From `@compiler-errors` 's comment rust-lang#127502 (comment)
Seems most of the ADTs don't have taint, so maybe it's not proper to change `TyCtxt::type_of` query.
@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Jul 10, 2024

Seems most of the ADTs don't have taint, so maybe it's not proper to change TyCtxt::type_of query.

If we changed the type_of query, does the ICE get fixed without having to add extra checks in typeck?

@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Jul 10, 2024

lol we could make https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/ty/struct.Ty.html#method.new_adt return an error type if the AdtDef is tainted. It may require some additional adjustments of other code that relies on getting an ty::Adt when explicitly asking for one, but it can be done.

@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

@oli-obk:

lol we could make https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/ty/struct.Ty.html#method.new_adt return an error type if the AdtDef is tainted. It may require some additional adjustments of other code that relies on getting an ty::Adt when explicitly asking for one, but it can be done.

I really don't think we should do this unless there's a compelling reason to do so. These constructor functions shouldn't be lying about their output.

It's one thing to change the type_of query, which already has precedent to return Error when the query has issues with resolving an item's type, but it's another thing to change the constructors themselves. I will probably reject such a change.

Copy link
Member

@compiler-errors compiler-errors left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You also need to delete a test from the crashes directory I think

@@ -2547,6 +2544,18 @@ impl<'a, 'tcx> FnCtxt<'a, 'tcx> {
"ban_nonexisting_field: field={:?}, base={:?}, expr={:?}, base_ty={:?}",
ident, base, expr, base_ty
);

for (ty, _) in self.autoderef(expr.span, base_ty) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd kinda rather you handle this in the autoderef loop in check_field.

Copy link
Member Author

@chenyukang chenyukang Jul 10, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You mean like this?
20cc0e1

I also thought about it, I was afraid to add extra perf since we need to track whether it's tainted in normal path.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

or even we return Ty::new_error(self.tcx(), guar) when there is an error.

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Comment on lines 2346 to 2350
if let Err(guard) = adt_def.non_enum_variant().has_errors() {
recovered_variant = Some(guard);
break;
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
if let Err(guard) = adt_def.non_enum_variant().has_errors() {
recovered_variant = Some(guard);
break;
}
if let Err(guar) = adt_def.non_enum_variant().has_errors() {
return Ty::new_error(self.tcx, guar);
}

Copy link
Member

@compiler-errors compiler-errors left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

also side note: s/guard/guar, since "guar" is short for "guarantee"

@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

Also can you squash this PR lol

@chenyukang chenyukang force-pushed the yukang-fix-struct-fields-ice branch 3 times, most recently from 3d09cfa to c5afe4d Compare July 10, 2024 16:07
Copy link
Member

@compiler-errors compiler-errors left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

One last thing -- can you leave a short comment next to all of these error-shortcuts you added saying something along the lines of "we don't care to report errors for a struct if the struct itself is tainted" or something

@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

r=me after

@chenyukang chenyukang force-pushed the yukang-fix-struct-fields-ice branch from c5afe4d to 3341966 Compare July 10, 2024 16:14
@compiler-errors compiler-errors changed the title Avoid no field error and ice no recovered struct variant Avoid "no field" error and ICE on recovered ADT variant Jul 10, 2024
@chenyukang chenyukang force-pushed the yukang-fix-struct-fields-ice branch from 3341966 to 07e6dd9 Compare July 10, 2024 16:19
@chenyukang
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r=compiler-errors

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 10, 2024

📌 Commit 07e6dd9 has been approved by compiler-errors

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jul 10, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 11, 2024

⌛ Testing commit 07e6dd9 with merge 8c39ac9...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 11, 2024

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: compiler-errors
Pushing 8c39ac9 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Jul 11, 2024
@bors bors merged commit 8c39ac9 into rust-lang:master Jul 11, 2024
7 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.81.0 milestone Jul 11, 2024
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (8c39ac9): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (secondary -3.0%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-3.0% [-3.0%, -3.0%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Cycles

Results (secondary -1.2%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-1.2% [-1.3%, -1.0%] 2
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

Results (primary 0.1%, secondary 0.1%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
0.1% [0.0%, 0.2%] 40
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.1% [0.0%, 0.2%] 21
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 0.1% [0.0%, 0.2%] 40

Bootstrap: 705.402s -> 703.504s (-0.27%)
Artifact size: 328.86 MiB -> 328.69 MiB (-0.05%)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
7 participants