Lower unchecked_div/_rem to MIR's BinOp::Div/Rem
#112168
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
|
r? @oli-obk (rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_cranelift cc @bjorn3 Some changes occurred to the CTFE / Miri engine cc @rust-lang/miri |
The MIR comment only mentions 0, not overflow. However the Miri implementation makes div and rem also UB on overflow. We should probably update the MIR comment then. |
|
This PR changes MIR cc @oli-obk, @RalfJung, @JakobDegen, @davidtwco, @celinval, @vakaras |
|
Updated the comments on |
|
@bors r+ |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 2, 2023
…mpiler-errors Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#109609 (Separate AnonConst from ConstBlock in HIR.) - rust-lang#112166 (bootstrap: Rename profile = user to profile = dist) - rust-lang#112168 (Lower `unchecked_div`/`_rem` to MIR's `BinOp::Div`/`Rem`) - rust-lang#112183 (Normalize anon consts in new solver) - rust-lang#112211 (pass `--lib` to `x doc`) - rust-lang#112223 (Don't ICE in new solver when auto traits have associated types) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
bjorn3
pushed a commit
to bjorn3/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 15, 2023
…o-mir, r=oli-obk Lower `unchecked_div`/`_rem` to MIR's `BinOp::Div`/`Rem` As described in <https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/mir/enum.BinOp.html#variant.Div>, the ordinary `BinOp`s for these are already UB for division by zero ([or overflow](https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#sdiv-instruction), [demo](https://rust.godbolt.org/z/71e7P7Exh)), as MIR building is responsible for inserting code to panic for those cases regardless of whether the overflow checks are enabled. So we can lower these in the same arm that lowers `wrapping_add` to MIR `BinOp::Add` and such, as all these cases turn into ordinary `Rvalue::BinaryOp`s.
This was referenced Jun 21, 2023
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.
As described in https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/mir/enum.BinOp.html#variant.Div, the ordinary
BinOps for these are already UB for division by zero (or overflow, demo), as MIR building is responsible for inserting code to panic for those cases regardless of whether the overflow checks are enabled.So we can lower these in the same arm that lowers
wrapping_addto MIRBinOp::Addand such, as all these cases turn into ordinaryRvalue::BinaryOps.