diff --git a/compiler/rustc_const_eval/src/interpret/intern.rs b/compiler/rustc_const_eval/src/interpret/intern.rs index 5727c0049bbbd..3dd6d4f3ed88b 100644 --- a/compiler/rustc_const_eval/src/interpret/intern.rs +++ b/compiler/rustc_const_eval/src/interpret/intern.rs @@ -125,7 +125,8 @@ pub fn intern_const_alloc_recursive< // Initialize recursive interning. let base_alloc_id = ret.ptr().provenance.unwrap().alloc_id(); - let mut todo = vec![(base_alloc_id, base_mutability)]; + let mut todo: Vec<_> = + intern_shallow(ecx, base_alloc_id, base_mutability).unwrap().map(|prov| prov).collect(); // We need to distinguish "has just been interned" from "was already in `tcx`", // so we track this in a separate set. let mut just_interned = FxHashSet::default(); @@ -142,52 +143,49 @@ pub fn intern_const_alloc_recursive< // raw pointers, so we cannot rely on validation to catch them -- and since interning runs // before validation, and interning doesn't know the type of anything, this means we can't show // better errors. Maybe we should consider doing validation before interning in the future. - while let Some((alloc_id, mutability)) = todo.pop() { + while let Some(prov) = todo.pop() { + let alloc_id = prov.alloc_id(); if ecx.tcx.try_get_global_alloc(alloc_id).is_some() { // Already interned. debug_assert!(!ecx.memory.alloc_map.contains_key(&alloc_id)); continue; } just_interned.insert(alloc_id); - let provs = intern_shallow(ecx, alloc_id, mutability).map_err(|()| { - ecx.tcx.dcx().emit_err(DanglingPtrInFinal { span: ecx.tcx.span, kind: intern_kind }) - })?; - for prov in provs { - let alloc_id = prov.alloc_id(); - if intern_kind != InternKind::Promoted - && inner_mutability == Mutability::Not - && !prov.immutable() + if intern_kind != InternKind::Promoted + && inner_mutability == Mutability::Not + && !prov.immutable() + { + if ecx.tcx.try_get_global_alloc(alloc_id).is_some() + && !just_interned.contains(&alloc_id) { - if ecx.tcx.try_get_global_alloc(alloc_id).is_some() - && !just_interned.contains(&alloc_id) - { - // This is a pointer to some memory from another constant. We encounter mutable - // pointers to such memory since we do not always track immutability through - // these "global" pointers. Allowing them is harmless; the point of these checks - // during interning is to justify why we intern the *new* allocations immutably, - // so we can completely ignore existing allocations. We also don't need to add - // this to the todo list, since after all it is already interned. - continue; - } - // Found a mutable pointer inside a const where inner allocations should be - // immutable. We exclude promoteds from this, since things like `&mut []` and - // `&None::>` lead to promotion that can produce mutable pointers. We rely - // on the promotion analysis not screwing up to ensure that it is sound to intern - // promoteds as immutable. - found_bad_mutable_pointer = true; + // This is a pointer to some memory from another constant. We encounter mutable + // pointers to such memory since we do not always track immutability through + // these "global" pointers. Allowing them is harmless; the point of these checks + // during interning is to justify why we intern the *new* allocations immutably, + // so we can completely ignore existing allocations. We also don't need to add + // this to the todo list, since after all it is already interned. + continue; } - // We always intern with `inner_mutability`, and furthermore we ensured above that if - // that is "immutable", then there are *no* mutable pointers anywhere in the newly - // interned memory -- justifying that we can indeed intern immutably. However this also - // means we can *not* easily intern immutably here if `prov.immutable()` is true and - // `inner_mutability` is `Mut`: there might be other pointers to that allocation, and - // we'd have to somehow check that they are *all* immutable before deciding that this - // allocation can be made immutable. In the future we could consider analyzing all - // pointers before deciding which allocations can be made immutable; but for now we are - // okay with losing some potential for immutability here. This can anyway only affect - // `static mut`. - todo.push((alloc_id, inner_mutability)); + // Found a mutable pointer inside a const where inner allocations should be + // immutable. We exclude promoteds from this, since things like `&mut []` and + // `&None::>` lead to promotion that can produce mutable pointers. We rely + // on the promotion analysis not screwing up to ensure that it is sound to intern + // promoteds as immutable. + found_bad_mutable_pointer = true; } + // We always intern with `inner_mutability`, and furthermore we ensured above that if + // that is "immutable", then there are *no* mutable pointers anywhere in the newly + // interned memory -- justifying that we can indeed intern immutably. However this also + // means we can *not* easily intern immutably here if `prov.immutable()` is true and + // `inner_mutability` is `Mut`: there might be other pointers to that allocation, and + // we'd have to somehow check that they are *all* immutable before deciding that this + // allocation can be made immutable. In the future we could consider analyzing all + // pointers before deciding which allocations can be made immutable; but for now we are + // okay with losing some potential for immutability here. This can anyway only affect + // `static mut`. + todo.extend(intern_shallow(ecx, alloc_id, inner_mutability).map_err(|()| { + ecx.tcx.dcx().emit_err(DanglingPtrInFinal { span: ecx.tcx.span, kind: intern_kind }) + })?); } if found_bad_mutable_pointer { return Err(ecx