You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Rollup merge of #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/rust#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.
0 commit comments