Visit more targets when validating attributes by rylev · Pull Request #80920 · rust-lang/rust

rylev · 2021-01-11T17:33:52Z

This begins to address #80048, allowing for additional validation of attributes.

There are more refactorings that can be done, though I think they should be tackled in additional PRs:

ICE when a builtin attribute is encountered that is not checked
Move some of the attr checking done ast_validation into rustc_passes
- note that this requires a bit of additional refactoring, especially of extern items which currently parse attributes (and thus are a part of the AST) but do not possess attributes in their HIR representation.
Rename Target to AttributeTarget
Refactor attribute validation completely to go through Visitor::visit_attribute.
- This would require at a minimum passing Target into this method which might be too big of a refactoring to be worth it.
- It's also likely not possible to do all the validation this way as some validation requires knowing what other attributes a target has.

r? @davidtwco

nagisa · 2021-01-11T18:58:10Z

@bors r+ LGTM!

bors · 2021-01-11T18:58:11Z

📌 Commit 39a1d774fcbfbb3dcf434cdf8ad9e0b97c3ecc1d has been approved by nagisa

davidtwco · 2021-01-11T19:04:43Z

In previous PRs which have checked more targets when validating attributes (#77015 and #79073), we did a crater run to check for regressions - this is technically a breaking change. Might be worth doing that here too.

nagisa · 2021-01-11T19:07:51Z

@bors r- try

bors · 2021-01-11T19:08:02Z

⌛ Trying commit 39a1d774fcbfbb3dcf434cdf8ad9e0b97c3ecc1d with merge bb9dbf1d07454a99066eabaabd5819851281494b...

bors · 2021-01-11T19:57:33Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: bb9dbf1d07454a99066eabaabd5819851281494b (bb9dbf1d07454a99066eabaabd5819851281494b)

nagisa · 2021-01-11T20:02:15Z

@craterbot check

craterbot · 2021-01-11T20:02:26Z

👌 Experiment pr-80920 created and queued.
🤖 Automatically detected try build bb9dbf1d07454a99066eabaabd5819851281494b
⚠️ Try build based on commit 6526e5c, but latest commit is 39a1d774fcbfbb3dcf434cdf8ad9e0b97c3ecc1d. Did you forget to make a new try build?
🔍 You can check out the queue and this experiment's details.

ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more

ehuss · 2021-01-11T20:16:05Z

Just wanted to give a heads up, I think PR #80641 is doing something almost identical, you may want to coordinate, and at least make sure the same tests are included and the issues (like "inline") are covered.

craterbot · 2021-01-12T20:50:56Z

🚧 Experiment pr-80920 is now running

ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more

rylev · 2021-01-14T18:04:25Z

Here's an issue on #[inline] on associated constants that we might want to check we fix with this.

craterbot · 2021-01-16T03:10:17Z

🎉 Experiment pr-80920 is completed!
📊 19 regressed and 8 fixed (140061 total)
📰 Open the full report.

⚠️ If you notice any spurious failure please add them to the blacklist!
ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more

davidtwco · 2021-01-18T13:15:28Z

Looks like this regresses olm (three dependencies, now also failing) and RustWebServer (no dependencies).

davidtwco · 2021-01-25T09:44:43Z

I'll nominate this for the language team to decide if the breaking changes are acceptable.

sanxiyn · 2021-01-31T23:01:30Z

Note that #[used] provides access to llvm.used, but support in Rust is known to be incomplete. I think, at least, #68322 should be fixed.

nikomatsakis · 2021-02-02T19:00:28Z

cc @jhaye and @poljar -- the regression on olm-rs seems real and affects the most recent version. Are you able to issue a 1.0.1 release that removes the #[used] from being used on fields?

Mark-Simulacrum · 2021-02-02T19:09:56Z

We discussed this during lang meeting today and concluded that we can move forward (we want to ping authors of the affected crates, but I believe have done so in Niko's comment and @joshtriplett is going to file an issue on the other project).

We also noted that generally speaking this breakage is unfortunate and we may want to move to only breaking crates over edition boundaries in cases like this, but we're not prepared to reconsider the current pre-existing behavior here for inline in other contexts. It's unclear to me that we get a huge amount of benefit from avoiding the breakage in cases like this too.

poljar · 2021-02-02T19:33:07Z

cc @jhaye and @poljar -- the regression on olm-rs seems real and affects the most recent version. Are you able to issue a 1.0.1 release that removes the #[used] from being used on fields?

Sure, PR is up. Sorry for the inconvenience.

jhaye · 2021-02-02T19:52:02Z

cc @jhaye and @poljar -- the regression on olm-rs seems real and affects the most recent version. Are you able to issue a 1.0.1 release that removes the #[used] from being used on fields?
Sure, PR is up. Sorry for the inconvenience.

v1.0.1 was just published.

davidtwco · 2021-02-07T14:18:34Z

I think we can probably land this then, could you rebase @rylev?

rylev · 2021-02-09T21:19:25Z

@davidtwco I've rebased. The PR is a lot less exciting than it started as, but there might be a reason to still merge it. Perhaps though we should further refactor how attributes are validated in other parts of the compiler.

davidtwco · 2021-02-13T18:25:30Z

@bors r+

bors · 2021-02-13T18:25:31Z

📌 Commit 9f0e1d4 has been approved by davidtwco

Rollup of 11 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#80523 (#[doc(inline)] sym_generated) - rust-lang#80920 (Visit more targets when validating attributes) - rust-lang#81720 (Updated smallvec version due to RUSTSEC-2021-0003) - rust-lang#81891 ([rustdoc-json] Make `header` a vec of modifiers, and FunctionPointer consistent) - rust-lang#81912 (Implement the precise analysis pass for lint `disjoint_capture_drop_reorder`) - rust-lang#81914 (Fixing bad suggestion for `_` in `const` type when a function rust-lang#81885) - rust-lang#81919 (BTreeMap: fix internal comments) - rust-lang#81927 (Add a regression test for rust-lang#32498) - rust-lang#81965 (Fix MIR pretty printer for non-local DefIds) - rust-lang#82029 (Use debug log level for developer oriented logs) - rust-lang#82056 (fix ice (rust-lang#82032)) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

eddyb · 2021-02-25T12:06:04Z

Sorry I missed these parts of the description, but hopefully this helps for future PRs:

This would require at a minimum passing Target into this method which might be too big of a refactoring to be worth it.

You can always keep data in the visitor itself, but that's harder to make sure nothing goes wrong with.

It's also likely not possible to do all the validation this way as some validation requires knowing what other attributes a target has.

It's a bit weird IMO that visit_attributes doesn't exist. That might be a good way to do it.

rust-highfive assigned davidtwco Jan 11, 2021

rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jan 11, 2021

bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jan 11, 2021

bors added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Jan 11, 2021

This comment has been minimized.
Sign in to view

craterbot added S-waiting-on-crater Status: Waiting on a crater run to be completed. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jan 11, 2021

rylev mentioned this pull request Jan 12, 2021
Add visitors for checking #[inline] #80641
Merged

ehuss mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2021
Add "Attributes on X" for various places attributes are allowed rust-lang/reference#355
Open
6 tasks

craterbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-crater Status: Waiting on a crater run to be completed. labels Jan 16, 2021

davidtwco added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jan 18, 2021

davidtwco added S-waiting-on-team and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jan 25, 2021

Mark-Simulacrum added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed I-nominated labels Feb 2, 2021

Visit more targets when checking attrs
396022b

rylev force-pushed the check_attr-refactor branch from 39a1d77 to 396022bCompare February 9, 2021 20:55

rylev commented Feb 9, 2021
View reviewed changes

Comment threadcompiler/rustc_passes/src/check_attr.rs

Add attr-on-params test
9f0e1d4

davidtwco approved these changes Feb 13, 2021
View reviewed changes

bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Feb 13, 2021

Dylan-DPC-zz mentioned this pull request Feb 14, 2021
Rollup of 11 pull requests #82103
Merged

bors merged commit ac1d26b into rust-lang:masterFeb 15, 2021

rustbot added this to the 1.52.0 milestone Feb 15, 2021

eddyb mentioned this pull request Mar 2, 2021
check_attr doesn't check every HIR node type that can carry attributes. #80048
Closed

steffahn mentioned this pull request Jun 12, 2021
ICE: compiler/rustc_middle/src/hir/map/mod.rs:810:21: no name for param # [ doc ( alias = "false" ) ] DiagnosticBuilder (hir_id=HirId { owner: DefId(0:4 ~ mutant[8787]::StructuredDiagnostic::extended), local_id: 1 }) #86239
Closed

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

rylev commented Jan 11, 2021

Uh oh!

nagisa commented Jan 11, 2021

Uh oh!

bors commented Jan 11, 2021

Uh oh!

davidtwco commented Jan 11, 2021

Uh oh!

nagisa commented Jan 11, 2021

Uh oh!

bors commented Jan 11, 2021

Uh oh!

bors commented Jan 11, 2021

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

nagisa commented Jan 11, 2021

Uh oh!

craterbot commented Jan 11, 2021

Uh oh!

ehuss commented Jan 11, 2021

Uh oh!

craterbot commented Jan 12, 2021

Uh oh!

rylev commented Jan 14, 2021

Uh oh!

craterbot commented Jan 16, 2021

Uh oh!

davidtwco commented Jan 18, 2021

Uh oh!

davidtwco commented Jan 25, 2021

Uh oh!

sanxiyn commented Jan 31, 2021

Uh oh!

nikomatsakis commented Feb 2, 2021

Uh oh!

Mark-Simulacrum commented Feb 2, 2021

Uh oh!

poljar commented Feb 2, 2021

Uh oh!

jhaye commented Feb 2, 2021

Uh oh!

davidtwco commented Feb 7, 2021

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rylev commented Feb 9, 2021

Uh oh!

davidtwco commented Feb 13, 2021

Uh oh!

bors commented Feb 13, 2021

Uh oh!

eddyb commented Feb 25, 2021

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

14 participants