Commit 0225f8b
authored
Rollup merge of rust-lang#144706 - zachs18:fix-144661, r=RalfJung
Do not give function allocations alignment in consteval and Miri.
We do not yet have a (clear and T-lang approved) design for how `#[align(N)]` on functions should affect function pointers' addresses on various platforms, so for now do not give function pointers alignment in consteval and Miri.
----
Old summary:
Not a full solution to <rust-lang#144661>, but fixes the immediate issue by making function allocations all have alignment 1 in consteval, ignoring `#[rustc_align(N)]`, so the compiler doesn't know if any offset other than 0 is non-null.
A more "principlied" solution would probably be to make function pointers to `#[instruction_set(arm::t32)]` functions be at offset 1 of an align-`max(2, align attribute)` allocation instead of at offset 0 of their allocation during consteval, and on wasm to either disallow `#[align(N)]` where N > 1, or to pad the function table such that the function pointer of a `#[align(N)]` function is a multiple of `N` at runtime.File tree
2 files changed
+6
-27
lines changed- compiler/rustc_const_eval/src/interpret
- src/tools/miri/tests/pass
2 files changed
+6
-27
lines changed| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | |
|---|---|---|---|
| |||
937 | 937 | | |
938 | 938 | | |
939 | 939 | | |
940 | | - | |
941 | | - | |
| 940 | + | |
| 941 | + | |
| 942 | + | |
| 943 | + | |
| 944 | + | |
| 945 | + | |
942 | 946 | | |
943 | 947 | | |
944 | 948 | | |
| |||
This file was deleted.
0 commit comments