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.

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

Enforce coroutine-closure layouts are identical #121122

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 15, 2024

Conversation

compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

Enforce that for an async closure, the by-ref and by-move coroutine layouts are identical. This is just a sanity check to make sure that optimizations aren't doing anything fishy.

r? oli-obk

@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 Feb 15, 2024
@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Feb 15, 2024

@bors r+ rollup

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Feb 15, 2024

📌 Commit e6a21f5 has been approved by oli-obk

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 Feb 15, 2024
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Feb 15, 2024
…iaskrgr

Rollup of 10 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#111106 (Add known issue of let binding to format_args doc)
 - rust-lang#118749 (Make contributing to windows bindings easier)
 - rust-lang#120982 (Add APIs for fetching foreign items )
 - rust-lang#121022 (rustdoc: cross-crate re-exports: correctly render late-bound params in source order even if early-bound params are present)
 - rust-lang#121082 (Clarified docs on non-atomic oprations on owned/mut refs to atomics)
 - rust-lang#121084 (Make sure `tcx.create_def` also depends on the forever red node, instead of just `tcx.at(span).create_def`)
 - rust-lang#121098 (Remove unnecessary else block from `thread_local!` expanded code)
 - rust-lang#121105 (Do not report overflow errors on ConstArgHasType goals)
 - rust-lang#121116 (Reinstate some delayed bugs.)
 - rust-lang#121122 (Enforce coroutine-closure layouts are identical)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit 829b59a into rust-lang:master Feb 15, 2024
11 checks passed
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Feb 15, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#121122 - compiler-errors:identical-layouts, r=oli-obk

Enforce coroutine-closure layouts are identical

Enforce that for an async closure, the by-ref and by-move coroutine layouts are identical. This is just a sanity check to make sure that optimizations aren't doing anything fishy.

r? oli-obk
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.78.0 milestone Feb 15, 2024
GuillaumeGomez added a commit to GuillaumeGomez/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 27, 2024
…ol, r=oli-obk

Make `TyCtxt::coroutine_layout` take coroutine's kind parameter

For coroutines that come from coroutine-closures (i.e. async closures), we may have two kinds of bodies stored in the coroutine; one that takes the closure's captures by reference, and one that takes the captures by move.

These currently have identical layouts, but if we do any optimization for these layouts that are related to the upvars, then they will diverge -- e.g. rust-lang#120168 (comment).

This PR relaxes the assertion I added in rust-lang#121122, and instead make the `TyCtxt::coroutine_layout` method take the `coroutine_kind_ty` argument from the coroutine, which will allow us to differentiate these by-move and by-ref bodies.
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 27, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#123021 - compiler-errors:coroutine-layout-lol, r=oli-obk

Make `TyCtxt::coroutine_layout` take coroutine's kind parameter

For coroutines that come from coroutine-closures (i.e. async closures), we may have two kinds of bodies stored in the coroutine; one that takes the closure's captures by reference, and one that takes the captures by move.

These currently have identical layouts, but if we do any optimization for these layouts that are related to the upvars, then they will diverge -- e.g. rust-lang#120168 (comment).

This PR relaxes the assertion I added in rust-lang#121122, and instead make the `TyCtxt::coroutine_layout` method take the `coroutine_kind_ty` argument from the coroutine, which will allow us to differentiate these by-move and by-ref bodies.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants