-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 242
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
analyze: support rewriting field projections on nullable pointers #1096
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
spernsteiner
force-pushed
the
analyze-rewrite-non-null
branch
2 times, most recently
from
June 25, 2024 19:10
8aa58bf
to
73652be
Compare
spernsteiner
changed the base branch from
analyze-rewrite-non-null
to
analyze-rewrite-non-null-base
June 25, 2024 19:12
spernsteiner
force-pushed
the
analyze-rewrite-nullable-projections
branch
from
June 26, 2024 23:42
7a068d3
to
eb78836
Compare
spernsteiner
force-pushed
the
analyze-rewrite-non-null-base
branch
from
June 26, 2024 23:42
ff20263
to
e526781
Compare
spernsteiner
changed the base branch from
analyze-rewrite-non-null-base
to
master
June 26, 2024 23:42
spernsteiner
force-pushed
the
analyze-rewrite-nullable-projections
branch
from
June 26, 2024 23:50
eb78836
to
75fc5ac
Compare
ahomescu
approved these changes
Jul 13, 2024
let mut ptrs = Vec::new(); | ||
let ty_str = context::print_ty_with_pointer_labels(acx.local_tys[local], |ptr| { | ||
let ty_str = context::print_ty_with_pointer_labels(lty, |ptr| { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Funny coincidence: this is where the analyzer was crashing before #1105
Projections are still rewritten incorrectly, but at least don't cause a panic now.
spernsteiner
force-pushed
the
analyze-rewrite-nullable-projections
branch
from
July 22, 2024 18:13
75fc5ac
to
8434b34
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This adds support for rewriting field projections like
&(*p).x
whenp
is a nullable pointer. The result looks likeSome(&(*p.unwrap()).x)
.I initially tried to avoid a panic when
p
is null by implementing a rewrite usingOption::map
:p.map(|ptr| &ptr.x)
. However, implementing this correctly wound up being quite complex. It's undefined behavior in C to do&p->x
whenp == NULL
, so it seems reasonable to introduce a panic in that case.The
mir_op
changes for this are relatively straightforward, butunlower
,distribute
, andconvert
needed some work. In particular,unlower
now has a new variantMirOriginDesc::LoadFromTempForAdjustment(i)
, which disambiguates cases like this:Previously, the
LoadFromTempForAdjustment
would be recorded asLoadFromTemp
, meaning there would be twoLoadFromTemp
entries in the unlower_map for the expression&(*p).x
. Rewrites attached to the firstLoadFromTemp
(in this case, the use of_tmp1
in the second statement) would be wrongly applied at the site of the lastLoadFromTemp
. This causedunwrap()
andSome(_)
rewrites to be applied in the wrong order, causing type errors in the rewritten code.