-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.7k
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
Don't access a static just for its size and alignment #62982
Conversation
r? @estebank (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
r? @RalfJung |
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.
r=me with these nits fixed and CI green
Co-Authored-By: Ralf Jung <[email protected]>
Co-Authored-By: Ralf Jung <[email protected]>
@bors r+ |
📌 Commit 0cd7167 has been approved by |
Don't access a static just for its size and alignment cc @RalfJung fixes rust-lang#62189
Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - #62423 (Fix cycle error with existential types) - #62979 (Cleanup save-analysis JsonDumper) - #62982 (Don't access a static just for its size and alignment) - #63013 (add `repr(transparent)` to `IoSliceMut` where missing) - #63014 (Stop bare trait lint applying to macro call sites) - #63036 (Add lib section to rustc_lexer's Cargo.toml) Failed merges: r? @ghost
return Ok((Size::from_bytes(alloc.bytes.len() as u64), alloc.align)); | ||
} | ||
// Function pointers. | ||
if let Ok(_) = self.get_fn_alloc(id) { |
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.
Ah, this is the bug that I missed. We no longer check the "machine" function pointers.
…oli-obk Miri: fix determining size of an "extra function" allocation Fixes [a bug](rust-lang/miri#862) introduced by rust-lang#62982. Best reviewed commit-by-commit. r? @oli-obk
Miri: Check that a ptr is aligned and inbounds already when evaluating `*` This syncs Miri with what the Nomicon and the Reference say, and resolves rust-lang/miri#447. Also this would not have worked without rust-lang#62982 due to new cycles. ;) r? @oli-obk
Miri: Check that a ptr is aligned and inbounds already when evaluating `*` This syncs Miri with what the Nomicon and the Reference say, and resolves rust-lang/miri#447. Also this would not have worked without rust-lang#62982 due to new cycles. ;) r? @oli-obk
Miri: Check that a ptr is aligned and inbounds already when evaluating `*` This syncs Miri with what the Nomicon and the Reference say, and resolves rust-lang/miri#447. Also this would not have worked without rust-lang#62982 due to new cycles. ;) r? @oli-obk
Miri: Check that a ptr is aligned and inbounds already when evaluating `*` This syncs Miri with what the Nomicon and the Reference say, and resolves rust-lang/miri#447. Also this would not have worked without rust-lang#62982 due to new cycles. ;) r? @oli-obk
Miri: Check that a ptr is aligned and inbounds already when evaluating `*` This syncs Miri with what the Nomicon and the Reference say, and resolves rust-lang/miri#447. Also this would not have worked without rust-lang#62982 due to new cycles. ;) r? @oli-obk
Reviewed by the compiler team: |
Didn't this land before the current beta branched? |
I'm going to remove the beta nominated label. It seems like it either landed or got rolle up or something. |
I also last-minute backported it to stable. Maybe that's where the confusion comes from. |
This indeed made it into (current) beta I believe as part of a5e7bb3. |
cc @RalfJung
fixes #62189