Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

#[expect(dead_code)] does not behave identically to #[allow(dead_code)] #114557

Closed
ojeda opened this issue Aug 6, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #114710
Closed

#[expect(dead_code)] does not behave identically to #[allow(dead_code)] #114557

ojeda opened this issue Aug 6, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #114710
Assignees
@Urgau
Labels
C-bug Category: This is a bug. F-lint_reasons `#![feature(lint_reasons)]` T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Comments

@ojeda
Copy link
Contributor

ojeda commented Aug 6, 2023 •
edited by rustbot
Loading

In its RFC, the #[expect(...)] lint attribute is said to function identically to #[allow(...)]. However, when trying out the attribute in the kernel, I found a case where I can see a difference.

The following code does not emit any warning:

fn f() {}

#[allow(dead_code)]
fn g() {
    f();
}

However, this does:

fn f() {}

#[expect(dead_code)]
fn g() {
    f();
}

In other words, with #[allow(...)], f is understood to be used, because it is called from g, even if g is dead code itself. With #[expect(...)], f is understood as not used.

Both 1.71.1 and nightly (32303b2 2023-07-29) behave the same way: https://godbolt.org/z/sMhYh1q11.

Cc'ing @xFrednet and @fmease who may be interested in this.
@ojeda ojeda added the C-bug Category: This is a bug. label Aug 6, 2023
@rustbot rustbot added the needs-triage This issue may need triage. Remove it if it has been sufficiently triaged. label Aug 6, 2023
@ojeda ojeda mentioned this issue Aug 6, 2023
Open
51 tasks
@xFrednet xFrednet added the F-lint_reasons `#![feature(lint_reasons)]` label Aug 6, 2023
@xFrednet
Copy link
Member

xFrednet commented Aug 6, 2023

Interesting, I assume that this is due to the actual lint implementation. It probably somewhere checks for the lint level and has a == Allow in it.

@Noratrieb Noratrieb added T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. and removed needs-triage This issue may need triage. Remove it if it has been sufficiently triaged. labels Aug 6, 2023
@Urgau
Copy link
Member

Urgau commented Aug 7, 2023

@rustbot claim

@Urgau Urgau mentioned this issue Aug 10, 2023
Merged
@bors bors closed this as completed in 1e836d1 Aug 12, 2023
github-actions bot pushed a commit to rust-lang/miri that referenced this issue Aug 16, 2023
@bors
Auto merge of #114710 - Urgau:fix-expect-dead_code-114557, r=cjgillot
53a7727 
Respect `#[expect]` the same way `#[allow]` is with the `dead_code` lint

This PR makes the `#[expect]` attribute being respected in the same way the `#[allow]` attribute is with the `dead_code` lint.

The fix is much more involved than I would have liked (and it's not because I didn't tried!), because the implementation took advantage of the fact that firing a lint in a allow context is a nop (for the user, as the lint is suppressed) to not fire-it at all.

And will it's fine for `#[allow]`, it definitively isn't for `#[expect]`, as the presence and absence of the lint is significant. So a big part of the PR is just adding the context information of whenever an item is on the worklist because of an `[allow]`/`#[expect]` or not.

Fixes rust-lang/rust#114557
@ojeda ojeda mentioned this issue Aug 18, 2023
Open
39 tasks
lnicola pushed a commit to lnicola/rust-analyzer that referenced this issue Apr 7, 2024
@bors
Auto merge of #114710 - Urgau:fix-expect-dead_code-114557, r=cjgillot
4bd5720 
Respect `#[expect]` the same way `#[allow]` is with the `dead_code` lint

This PR makes the `#[expect]` attribute being respected in the same way the `#[allow]` attribute is with the `dead_code` lint.

The fix is much more involved than I would have liked (and it's not because I didn't tried!), because the implementation took advantage of the fact that firing a lint in a allow context is a nop (for the user, as the lint is suppressed) to not fire-it at all.

And will it's fine for `#[allow]`, it definitively isn't for `#[expect]`, as the presence and absence of the lint is significant. So a big part of the PR is just adding the context information of whenever an item is on the worklist because of an `[allow]`/`#[expect]` or not.

Fixes rust-lang/rust#114557
RalfJung pushed a commit to RalfJung/rust-analyzer that referenced this issue Apr 27, 2024
@bors
Auto merge of #114710 - Urgau:fix-expect-dead_code-114557, r=cjgillot
b549f23 
Respect `#[expect]` the same way `#[allow]` is with the `dead_code` lint

This PR makes the `#[expect]` attribute being respected in the same way the `#[allow]` attribute is with the `dead_code` lint.

The fix is much more involved than I would have liked (and it's not because I didn't tried!), because the implementation took advantage of the fact that firing a lint in a allow context is a nop (for the user, as the lint is suppressed) to not fire-it at all.

And will it's fine for `#[allow]`, it definitively isn't for `#[expect]`, as the presence and absence of the lint is significant. So a big part of the PR is just adding the context information of whenever an item is on the worklist because of an `[allow]`/`#[expect]` or not.

Fixes rust-lang/rust#114557
ojeda added a commit to ojeda/linux that referenced this issue Sep 3, 2024
@ojeda
rust: start using the unstable #[expect(...)] attribute
fbc9566 
In Rust, it is possible to `allow` particular warnings (diagnostics,
lints) locally, making the compiler ignore instances of a given warning
within a given function, module, block, etc.

It is similar to `#pragma GCC diagnostic push` + `ignored` + `pop` in C:

    #pragma GCC diagnostic push
    #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function"
    static void f(void) {}
    #pragma GCC diagnostic pop

But way less verbose:

    #[allow(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

By that virtue, it makes it possible to comfortably enable more
diagnostics by default (i.e. outside `W=` levels) that may have some
false positives but that are otherwise quite useful to keep enabled to
catch potential mistakes.

The `#[expect(...)]` attribute [1] takes this further, and makes the
compiler warn if the diagnostic was _not_ produced. For instance, the
following will ensure that, when `f()` is called somewhere, we will have
to remove the attribute:

    #[expect(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

If we do not, we get a warning from the compiler:

    warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
     --> x.rs:3:10
      |
    3 | #[expect(dead_code)]
      |          ^^^^^^^^^
      |
      = note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default

This means that `expect`s do not get forgotten when they are not needed.

See the next commit for more details, nuances on its usage and
documentation on the feature.

The attribute requires the `lint_reasons` [2] unstable feature, but it
is becoming stable in 1.81.0 (currently in beta), to be released on
2024-09-05 and it has already been useful to clean things up in this
patch series, finding cases where the `allow`s should not have been there.

Thus, enable `lint_reasons` and convert some of our `allow`s to `expect`s
where possible.

This feature was also an example of the ongoing collaboration between
Rust and the kernel -- we tested it in the kernel early on and found an
issue that was quickly resolved [3].

Cc: Fridtjof Stoldt <xfrednet@gmail.com>
Cc: Urgau <urgau@numericable.fr>
Link: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html#expect-lint-attribute [1]
Link: rust-lang/rust#54503 [2]
Link: rust-lang/rust#114557 [3]
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
ojeda added a commit to ojeda/linux that referenced this issue Sep 4, 2024
@ojeda
rust: start using the unstable #[expect(...)] attribute
7c64c9d 
In Rust, it is possible to `allow` particular warnings (diagnostics,
lints) locally, making the compiler ignore instances of a given warning
within a given function, module, block, etc.

It is similar to `#pragma GCC diagnostic push` + `ignored` + `pop` in C:

    #pragma GCC diagnostic push
    #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function"
    static void f(void) {}
    #pragma GCC diagnostic pop

But way less verbose:

    #[allow(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

By that virtue, it makes it possible to comfortably enable more
diagnostics by default (i.e. outside `W=` levels) that may have some
false positives but that are otherwise quite useful to keep enabled to
catch potential mistakes.

The `#[expect(...)]` attribute [1] takes this further, and makes the
compiler warn if the diagnostic was _not_ produced. For instance, the
following will ensure that, when `f()` is called somewhere, we will have
to remove the attribute:

    #[expect(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

If we do not, we get a warning from the compiler:

    warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
     --> x.rs:3:10
      |
    3 | #[expect(dead_code)]
      |          ^^^^^^^^^
      |
      = note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default

This means that `expect`s do not get forgotten when they are not needed.

See the next commit for more details, nuances on its usage and
documentation on the feature.

The attribute requires the `lint_reasons` [2] unstable feature, but it
is becoming stable in 1.81.0 (currently in beta), to be released on
2024-09-05 and it has already been useful to clean things up in this
patch series, finding cases where the `allow`s should not have been there.

Thus, enable `lint_reasons` and convert some of our `allow`s to `expect`s
where possible.

This feature was also an example of the ongoing collaboration between
Rust and the kernel -- we tested it in the kernel early on and found an
issue that was quickly resolved [3].

Cc: Fridtjof Stoldt <xfrednet@gmail.com>
Cc: Urgau <urgau@numericable.fr>
Link: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html#expect-lint-attribute [1]
Link: rust-lang/rust#54503 [2]
Link: rust-lang/rust#114557 [3]
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
ojeda added a commit to ojeda/linux that referenced this issue Sep 4, 2024
@ojeda
rust: start using the unstable #[expect(...)] attribute
fec10f9 
In Rust, it is possible to `allow` particular warnings (diagnostics,
lints) locally, making the compiler ignore instances of a given warning
within a given function, module, block, etc.

It is similar to `#pragma GCC diagnostic push` + `ignored` + `pop` in C:

    #pragma GCC diagnostic push
    #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function"
    static void f(void) {}
    #pragma GCC diagnostic pop

But way less verbose:

    #[allow(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

By that virtue, it makes it possible to comfortably enable more
diagnostics by default (i.e. outside `W=` levels) that may have some
false positives but that are otherwise quite useful to keep enabled to
catch potential mistakes.

The `#[expect(...)]` attribute [1] takes this further, and makes the
compiler warn if the diagnostic was _not_ produced. For instance, the
following will ensure that, when `f()` is called somewhere, we will have
to remove the attribute:

    #[expect(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

If we do not, we get a warning from the compiler:

    warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
     --> x.rs:3:10
      |
    3 | #[expect(dead_code)]
      |          ^^^^^^^^^
      |
      = note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default

This means that `expect`s do not get forgotten when they are not needed.

See the next commit for more details, nuances on its usage and
documentation on the feature.

The attribute requires the `lint_reasons` [2] unstable feature, but it
is becoming stable in 1.81.0 (currently in beta), to be released on
2024-09-05 and it has already been useful to clean things up in this
patch series, finding cases where the `allow`s should not have been there.

Thus, enable `lint_reasons` and convert some of our `allow`s to `expect`s
where possible.

This feature was also an example of the ongoing collaboration between
Rust and the kernel -- we tested it in the kernel early on and found an
issue that was quickly resolved [3].

Cc: Fridtjof Stoldt <xfrednet@gmail.com>
Cc: Urgau <urgau@numericable.fr>
Link: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html#expect-lint-attribute [1]
Link: rust-lang/rust#54503 [2]
Link: rust-lang/rust#114557 [3]
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
ojeda added a commit to ojeda/linux that referenced this issue Sep 4, 2024
@ojeda
rust: start using the #[expect(...)] attribute
b36bca5 
In Rust, it is possible to `allow` particular warnings (diagnostics,
lints) locally, making the compiler ignore instances of a given warning
within a given function, module, block, etc.

It is similar to `#pragma GCC diagnostic push` + `ignored` + `pop` in C:

    #pragma GCC diagnostic push
    #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function"
    static void f(void) {}
    #pragma GCC diagnostic pop

But way less verbose:

    #[allow(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

By that virtue, it makes it possible to comfortably enable more
diagnostics by default (i.e. outside `W=` levels) that may have some
false positives but that are otherwise quite useful to keep enabled to
catch potential mistakes.

The `#[expect(...)]` attribute [1] takes this further, and makes the
compiler warn if the diagnostic was _not_ produced. For instance, the
following will ensure that, when `f()` is called somewhere, we will have
to remove the attribute:

    #[expect(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

If we do not, we get a warning from the compiler:

    warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
     --> x.rs:3:10
      |
    3 | #[expect(dead_code)]
      |          ^^^^^^^^^
      |
      = note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default

This means that `expect`s do not get forgotten when they are not needed.

See the next commit for more details, nuances on its usage and
documentation on the feature.

The attribute requires the `lint_reasons` [2] unstable feature, but it
is becoming stable in 1.81.0 (to be released on 2024-09-05) and it has
already been useful to clean things up in this patch series, finding
cases where the `allow`s should not have been there.

Thus, enable `lint_reasons` and convert some of our `allow`s to `expect`s
where possible.

This feature was also an example of the ongoing collaboration between
Rust and the kernel -- we tested it in the kernel early on and found an
issue that was quickly resolved [3].

Cc: Fridtjof Stoldt <xfrednet@gmail.com>
Cc: Urgau <urgau@numericable.fr>
Link: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html#expect-lint-attribute [1]
Link: rust-lang/rust#54503 [2]
Link: rust-lang/rust#114557 [3]
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
ojeda added a commit to ojeda/linux that referenced this issue Sep 4, 2024
@ojeda
rust: start using the #[expect(...)] attribute
f9aa25e 
In Rust, it is possible to `allow` particular warnings (diagnostics,
lints) locally, making the compiler ignore instances of a given warning
within a given function, module, block, etc.

It is similar to `#pragma GCC diagnostic push` + `ignored` + `pop` in C:

    #pragma GCC diagnostic push
    #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function"
    static void f(void) {}
    #pragma GCC diagnostic pop

But way less verbose:

    #[allow(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

By that virtue, it makes it possible to comfortably enable more
diagnostics by default (i.e. outside `W=` levels) that may have some
false positives but that are otherwise quite useful to keep enabled to
catch potential mistakes.

The `#[expect(...)]` attribute [1] takes this further, and makes the
compiler warn if the diagnostic was _not_ produced. For instance, the
following will ensure that, when `f()` is called somewhere, we will have
to remove the attribute:

    #[expect(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

If we do not, we get a warning from the compiler:

    warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
     --> x.rs:3:10
      |
    3 | #[expect(dead_code)]
      |          ^^^^^^^^^
      |
      = note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default

This means that `expect`s do not get forgotten when they are not needed.

See the next commit for more details, nuances on its usage and
documentation on the feature.

The attribute requires the `lint_reasons` [2] unstable feature, but it
is becoming stable in 1.81.0 (to be released on 2024-09-05) and it has
already been useful to clean things up in this patch series, finding
cases where the `allow`s should not have been there.

Thus, enable `lint_reasons` and convert some of our `allow`s to `expect`s
where possible.

This feature was also an example of the ongoing collaboration between
Rust and the kernel -- we tested it in the kernel early on and found an
issue that was quickly resolved [3].

Cc: Fridtjof Stoldt <xfrednet@gmail.com>
Cc: Urgau <urgau@numericable.fr>
Link: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html#expect-lint-attribute [1]
Link: rust-lang/rust#54503 [2]
Link: rust-lang/rust#114557 [3]
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
ojeda added a commit to ojeda/linux that referenced this issue Oct 3, 2024
@ojeda
rust: start using the #[expect(...)] attribute
b393a41 
In Rust, it is possible to `allow` particular warnings (diagnostics,
lints) locally, making the compiler ignore instances of a given warning
within a given function, module, block, etc.

It is similar to `#pragma GCC diagnostic push` + `ignored` + `pop` in C:

    #pragma GCC diagnostic push
    #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function"
    static void f(void) {}
    #pragma GCC diagnostic pop

But way less verbose:

    #[allow(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

By that virtue, it makes it possible to comfortably enable more
diagnostics by default (i.e. outside `W=` levels) that may have some
false positives but that are otherwise quite useful to keep enabled to
catch potential mistakes.

The `#[expect(...)]` attribute [1] takes this further, and makes the
compiler warn if the diagnostic was _not_ produced. For instance, the
following will ensure that, when `f()` is called somewhere, we will have
to remove the attribute:

    #[expect(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

If we do not, we get a warning from the compiler:

    warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
     --> x.rs:3:10
      |
    3 | #[expect(dead_code)]
      |          ^^^^^^^^^
      |
      = note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default

This means that `expect`s do not get forgotten when they are not needed.

See the next commit for more details, nuances on its usage and
documentation on the feature.

The attribute requires the `lint_reasons` [2] unstable feature, but it
is becoming stable in 1.81.0 (to be released on 2024-09-05) and it has
already been useful to clean things up in this patch series, finding
cases where the `allow`s should not have been there.

Thus, enable `lint_reasons` and convert some of our `allow`s to `expect`s
where possible.

This feature was also an example of the ongoing collaboration between
Rust and the kernel -- we tested it in the kernel early on and found an
issue that was quickly resolved [3].

Cc: Fridtjof Stoldt <xfrednet@gmail.com>
Cc: Urgau <urgau@numericable.fr>
Link: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html#expect-lint-attribute [1]
Link: rust-lang/rust#54503 [2]
Link: rust-lang/rust#114557 [3]
Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Trevor Gross <tmgross@umich.edu>
Tested-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240904204347.168520-18-ojeda@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
ojeda added a commit to ojeda/linux that referenced this issue Oct 3, 2024
@ojeda
rust: start using the #[expect(...)] attribute
aa3501d 
In Rust, it is possible to `allow` particular warnings (diagnostics,
lints) locally, making the compiler ignore instances of a given warning
within a given function, module, block, etc.

It is similar to `#pragma GCC diagnostic push` + `ignored` + `pop` in C:

    #pragma GCC diagnostic push
    #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function"
    static void f(void) {}
    #pragma GCC diagnostic pop

But way less verbose:

    #[allow(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

By that virtue, it makes it possible to comfortably enable more
diagnostics by default (i.e. outside `W=` levels) that may have some
false positives but that are otherwise quite useful to keep enabled to
catch potential mistakes.

The `#[expect(...)]` attribute [1] takes this further, and makes the
compiler warn if the diagnostic was _not_ produced. For instance, the
following will ensure that, when `f()` is called somewhere, we will have
to remove the attribute:

    #[expect(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

If we do not, we get a warning from the compiler:

    warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
     --> x.rs:3:10
      |
    3 | #[expect(dead_code)]
      |          ^^^^^^^^^
      |
      = note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default

This means that `expect`s do not get forgotten when they are not needed.

See the next commit for more details, nuances on its usage and
documentation on the feature.

The attribute requires the `lint_reasons` [2] unstable feature, but it
is becoming stable in 1.81.0 (to be released on 2024-09-05) and it has
already been useful to clean things up in this patch series, finding
cases where the `allow`s should not have been there.

Thus, enable `lint_reasons` and convert some of our `allow`s to `expect`s
where possible.

This feature was also an example of the ongoing collaboration between
Rust and the kernel -- we tested it in the kernel early on and found an
issue that was quickly resolved [3].

Cc: Fridtjof Stoldt <xfrednet@gmail.com>
Cc: Urgau <urgau@numericable.fr>
Link: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html#expect-lint-attribute [1]
Link: rust-lang/rust#54503 [2]
Link: rust-lang/rust#114557 [3]
Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Trevor Gross <tmgross@umich.edu>
Tested-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240904204347.168520-18-ojeda@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
ojeda added a commit to Rust-for-Linux/linux that referenced this issue Oct 7, 2024
@ojeda
rust: start using the #[expect(...)] attribute
703667d 
In Rust, it is possible to `allow` particular warnings (diagnostics,
lints) locally, making the compiler ignore instances of a given warning
within a given function, module, block, etc.

It is similar to `#pragma GCC diagnostic push` + `ignored` + `pop` in C:

    #pragma GCC diagnostic push
    #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function"
    static void f(void) {}
    #pragma GCC diagnostic pop

But way less verbose:

    #[allow(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

By that virtue, it makes it possible to comfortably enable more
diagnostics by default (i.e. outside `W=` levels) that may have some
false positives but that are otherwise quite useful to keep enabled to
catch potential mistakes.

The `#[expect(...)]` attribute [1] takes this further, and makes the
compiler warn if the diagnostic was _not_ produced. For instance, the
following will ensure that, when `f()` is called somewhere, we will have
to remove the attribute:

    #[expect(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

If we do not, we get a warning from the compiler:

    warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
     --> x.rs:3:10
      |
    3 | #[expect(dead_code)]
      |          ^^^^^^^^^
      |
      = note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default

This means that `expect`s do not get forgotten when they are not needed.

See the next commit for more details, nuances on its usage and
documentation on the feature.

The attribute requires the `lint_reasons` [2] unstable feature, but it
is becoming stable in 1.81.0 (to be released on 2024-09-05) and it has
already been useful to clean things up in this patch series, finding
cases where the `allow`s should not have been there.

Thus, enable `lint_reasons` and convert some of our `allow`s to `expect`s
where possible.

This feature was also an example of the ongoing collaboration between
Rust and the kernel -- we tested it in the kernel early on and found an
issue that was quickly resolved [3].

Cc: Fridtjof Stoldt <xfrednet@gmail.com>
Cc: Urgau <urgau@numericable.fr>
Link: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html#expect-lint-attribute [1]
Link: rust-lang/rust#54503 [2]
Link: rust-lang/rust#114557 [3]
Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Trevor Gross <tmgross@umich.edu>
Tested-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240904204347.168520-18-ojeda@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
ojeda added a commit to Rust-for-Linux/linux that referenced this issue Oct 7, 2024
@ojeda
rust: start using the #[expect(...)] attribute
1f9ed17 
In Rust, it is possible to `allow` particular warnings (diagnostics,
lints) locally, making the compiler ignore instances of a given warning
within a given function, module, block, etc.

It is similar to `#pragma GCC diagnostic push` + `ignored` + `pop` in C:

    #pragma GCC diagnostic push
    #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function"
    static void f(void) {}
    #pragma GCC diagnostic pop

But way less verbose:

    #[allow(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

By that virtue, it makes it possible to comfortably enable more
diagnostics by default (i.e. outside `W=` levels) that may have some
false positives but that are otherwise quite useful to keep enabled to
catch potential mistakes.

The `#[expect(...)]` attribute [1] takes this further, and makes the
compiler warn if the diagnostic was _not_ produced. For instance, the
following will ensure that, when `f()` is called somewhere, we will have
to remove the attribute:

    #[expect(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

If we do not, we get a warning from the compiler:

    warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
     --> x.rs:3:10
      |
    3 | #[expect(dead_code)]
      |          ^^^^^^^^^
      |
      = note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default

This means that `expect`s do not get forgotten when they are not needed.

See the next commit for more details, nuances on its usage and
documentation on the feature.

The attribute requires the `lint_reasons` [2] unstable feature, but it
is becoming stable in 1.81.0 (to be released on 2024-09-05) and it has
already been useful to clean things up in this patch series, finding
cases where the `allow`s should not have been there.

Thus, enable `lint_reasons` and convert some of our `allow`s to `expect`s
where possible.

This feature was also an example of the ongoing collaboration between
Rust and the kernel -- we tested it in the kernel early on and found an
issue that was quickly resolved [3].

Cc: Fridtjof Stoldt <xfrednet@gmail.com>
Cc: Urgau <urgau@numericable.fr>
Link: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html#expect-lint-attribute [1]
Link: rust-lang/rust#54503 [2]
Link: rust-lang/rust#114557 [3]
Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Trevor Gross <tmgross@umich.edu>
Tested-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240904204347.168520-18-ojeda@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
alistair23 pushed a commit to alistair23/linux that referenced this issue Nov 11, 2024
@ojeda @alistair23
rust: start using the #[expect(...)] attribute
18cc31e 
In Rust, it is possible to `allow` particular warnings (diagnostics,
lints) locally, making the compiler ignore instances of a given warning
within a given function, module, block, etc.

It is similar to `#pragma GCC diagnostic push` + `ignored` + `pop` in C:

    #pragma GCC diagnostic push
    #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function"
    static void f(void) {}
    #pragma GCC diagnostic pop

But way less verbose:

    #[allow(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

By that virtue, it makes it possible to comfortably enable more
diagnostics by default (i.e. outside `W=` levels) that may have some
false positives but that are otherwise quite useful to keep enabled to
catch potential mistakes.

The `#[expect(...)]` attribute [1] takes this further, and makes the
compiler warn if the diagnostic was _not_ produced. For instance, the
following will ensure that, when `f()` is called somewhere, we will have
to remove the attribute:

    #[expect(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

If we do not, we get a warning from the compiler:

    warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
     --> x.rs:3:10
      |
    3 | #[expect(dead_code)]
      |          ^^^^^^^^^
      |
      = note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default

This means that `expect`s do not get forgotten when they are not needed.

See the next commit for more details, nuances on its usage and
documentation on the feature.

The attribute requires the `lint_reasons` [2] unstable feature, but it
is becoming stable in 1.81.0 (to be released on 2024-09-05) and it has
already been useful to clean things up in this patch series, finding
cases where the `allow`s should not have been there.

Thus, enable `lint_reasons` and convert some of our `allow`s to `expect`s
where possible.

This feature was also an example of the ongoing collaboration between
Rust and the kernel -- we tested it in the kernel early on and found an
issue that was quickly resolved [3].

Cc: Fridtjof Stoldt <xfrednet@gmail.com>
Cc: Urgau <urgau@numericable.fr>
Link: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html#expect-lint-attribute [1]
Link: rust-lang/rust#54503 [2]
Link: rust-lang/rust#114557 [3]
Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Trevor Gross <tmgross@umich.edu>
Tested-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240904204347.168520-18-ojeda@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
alistair23 pushed a commit to alistair23/linux that referenced this issue Nov 12, 2024
@ojeda @alistair23
rust: start using the #[expect(...)] attribute
714b821 
In Rust, it is possible to `allow` particular warnings (diagnostics,
lints) locally, making the compiler ignore instances of a given warning
within a given function, module, block, etc.

It is similar to `#pragma GCC diagnostic push` + `ignored` + `pop` in C:

    #pragma GCC diagnostic push
    #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function"
    static void f(void) {}
    #pragma GCC diagnostic pop

But way less verbose:

    #[allow(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

By that virtue, it makes it possible to comfortably enable more
diagnostics by default (i.e. outside `W=` levels) that may have some
false positives but that are otherwise quite useful to keep enabled to
catch potential mistakes.

The `#[expect(...)]` attribute [1] takes this further, and makes the
compiler warn if the diagnostic was _not_ produced. For instance, the
following will ensure that, when `f()` is called somewhere, we will have
to remove the attribute:

    #[expect(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

If we do not, we get a warning from the compiler:

    warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
     --> x.rs:3:10
      |
    3 | #[expect(dead_code)]
      |          ^^^^^^^^^
      |
      = note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default

This means that `expect`s do not get forgotten when they are not needed.

See the next commit for more details, nuances on its usage and
documentation on the feature.

The attribute requires the `lint_reasons` [2] unstable feature, but it
is becoming stable in 1.81.0 (to be released on 2024-09-05) and it has
already been useful to clean things up in this patch series, finding
cases where the `allow`s should not have been there.

Thus, enable `lint_reasons` and convert some of our `allow`s to `expect`s
where possible.

This feature was also an example of the ongoing collaboration between
Rust and the kernel -- we tested it in the kernel early on and found an
issue that was quickly resolved [3].

Cc: Fridtjof Stoldt <xfrednet@gmail.com>
Cc: Urgau <urgau@numericable.fr>
Link: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html#expect-lint-attribute [1]
Link: rust-lang/rust#54503 [2]
Link: rust-lang/rust#114557 [3]
Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Trevor Gross <tmgross@umich.edu>
Tested-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240904204347.168520-18-ojeda@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
@ojeda ojeda mentioned this issue Nov 18, 2024
Open
88 tasks
herrnst pushed a commit to herrnst/linux-asahi that referenced this issue Nov 21, 2024
@ojeda @herrnst
rust: start using the #[expect(...)] attribute
e51fc81 
In Rust, it is possible to `allow` particular warnings (diagnostics,
lints) locally, making the compiler ignore instances of a given warning
within a given function, module, block, etc.

It is similar to `#pragma GCC diagnostic push` + `ignored` + `pop` in C:

    #pragma GCC diagnostic push
    #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function"
    static void f(void) {}
    #pragma GCC diagnostic pop

But way less verbose:

    #[allow(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

By that virtue, it makes it possible to comfortably enable more
diagnostics by default (i.e. outside `W=` levels) that may have some
false positives but that are otherwise quite useful to keep enabled to
catch potential mistakes.

The `#[expect(...)]` attribute [1] takes this further, and makes the
compiler warn if the diagnostic was _not_ produced. For instance, the
following will ensure that, when `f()` is called somewhere, we will have
to remove the attribute:

    #[expect(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

If we do not, we get a warning from the compiler:

    warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
     --> x.rs:3:10
      |
    3 | #[expect(dead_code)]
      |          ^^^^^^^^^
      |
      = note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default

This means that `expect`s do not get forgotten when they are not needed.

See the next commit for more details, nuances on its usage and
documentation on the feature.

The attribute requires the `lint_reasons` [2] unstable feature, but it
is becoming stable in 1.81.0 (to be released on 2024-09-05) and it has
already been useful to clean things up in this patch series, finding
cases where the `allow`s should not have been there.

Thus, enable `lint_reasons` and convert some of our `allow`s to `expect`s
where possible.

This feature was also an example of the ongoing collaboration between
Rust and the kernel -- we tested it in the kernel early on and found an
issue that was quickly resolved [3].

Cc: Fridtjof Stoldt <xfrednet@gmail.com>
Cc: Urgau <urgau@numericable.fr>
Link: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html#expect-lint-attribute [1]
Link: rust-lang/rust#54503 [2]
Link: rust-lang/rust#114557 [3]
Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Trevor Gross <tmgross@umich.edu>
Tested-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240904204347.168520-18-ojeda@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
herrnst pushed a commit to herrnst/linux-asahi that referenced this issue Nov 22, 2024
@ojeda @herrnst
rust: start using the #[expect(...)] attribute
a94d668 
In Rust, it is possible to `allow` particular warnings (diagnostics,
lints) locally, making the compiler ignore instances of a given warning
within a given function, module, block, etc.

It is similar to `#pragma GCC diagnostic push` + `ignored` + `pop` in C:

    #pragma GCC diagnostic push
    #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function"
    static void f(void) {}
    #pragma GCC diagnostic pop

But way less verbose:

    #[allow(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

By that virtue, it makes it possible to comfortably enable more
diagnostics by default (i.e. outside `W=` levels) that may have some
false positives but that are otherwise quite useful to keep enabled to
catch potential mistakes.

The `#[expect(...)]` attribute [1] takes this further, and makes the
compiler warn if the diagnostic was _not_ produced. For instance, the
following will ensure that, when `f()` is called somewhere, we will have
to remove the attribute:

    #[expect(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

If we do not, we get a warning from the compiler:

    warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
     --> x.rs:3:10
      |
    3 | #[expect(dead_code)]
      |          ^^^^^^^^^
      |
      = note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default

This means that `expect`s do not get forgotten when they are not needed.

See the next commit for more details, nuances on its usage and
documentation on the feature.

The attribute requires the `lint_reasons` [2] unstable feature, but it
is becoming stable in 1.81.0 (to be released on 2024-09-05) and it has
already been useful to clean things up in this patch series, finding
cases where the `allow`s should not have been there.

Thus, enable `lint_reasons` and convert some of our `allow`s to `expect`s
where possible.

This feature was also an example of the ongoing collaboration between
Rust and the kernel -- we tested it in the kernel early on and found an
issue that was quickly resolved [3].

Cc: Fridtjof Stoldt <xfrednet@gmail.com>
Cc: Urgau <urgau@numericable.fr>
Link: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html#expect-lint-attribute [1]
Link: rust-lang/rust#54503 [2]
Link: rust-lang/rust#114557 [3]
Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Trevor Gross <tmgross@umich.edu>
Tested-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240904204347.168520-18-ojeda@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
WhatAmISupposedToPutHere pushed a commit to WhatAmISupposedToPutHere/linux that referenced this issue Nov 23, 2024
@ojeda @jannau
rust: start using the #[expect(...)] attribute
46c8bd3 
In Rust, it is possible to `allow` particular warnings (diagnostics,
lints) locally, making the compiler ignore instances of a given warning
within a given function, module, block, etc.

It is similar to `#pragma GCC diagnostic push` + `ignored` + `pop` in C:

    #pragma GCC diagnostic push
    #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function"
    static void f(void) {}
    #pragma GCC diagnostic pop

But way less verbose:

    #[allow(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

By that virtue, it makes it possible to comfortably enable more
diagnostics by default (i.e. outside `W=` levels) that may have some
false positives but that are otherwise quite useful to keep enabled to
catch potential mistakes.

The `#[expect(...)]` attribute [1] takes this further, and makes the
compiler warn if the diagnostic was _not_ produced. For instance, the
following will ensure that, when `f()` is called somewhere, we will have
to remove the attribute:

    #[expect(dead_code)]
    fn f() {}

If we do not, we get a warning from the compiler:

    warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
     --> x.rs:3:10
      |
    3 | #[expect(dead_code)]
      |          ^^^^^^^^^
      |
      = note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default

This means that `expect`s do not get forgotten when they are not needed.

See the next commit for more details, nuances on its usage and
documentation on the feature.

The attribute requires the `lint_reasons` [2] unstable feature, but it
is becoming stable in 1.81.0 (to be released on 2024-09-05) and it has
already been useful to clean things up in this patch series, finding
cases where the `allow`s should not have been there.

Thus, enable `lint_reasons` and convert some of our `allow`s to `expect`s
where possible.

This feature was also an example of the ongoing collaboration between
Rust and the kernel -- we tested it in the kernel early on and found an
issue that was quickly resolved [3].

Cc: Fridtjof Stoldt <xfrednet@gmail.com>
Cc: Urgau <urgau@numericable.fr>
Link: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html#expect-lint-attribute [1]
Link: rust-lang/rust#54503 [2]
Link: rust-lang/rust#114557 [3]
Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Trevor Gross <tmgross@umich.edu>
Tested-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240904204347.168520-18-ojeda@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@Urgau Urgau

Labels
C-bug Category: This is a bug. F-lint_reasons `#![feature(lint_reasons)]` T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

Respect #[expect] the same way #[allow] is with the dead_code lint Urgau/rust
5 participants
@ojeda @Urgau @xFrednet @rustbot @Noratrieb