Skip to content

[5.9] MoveOnlyAddressChecker: Confine analysis to current formal access. #64864

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 3, 2023

Conversation

jckarter
Copy link
Contributor

@jckarter jckarter commented Apr 3, 2023

Code can only locally interact with a mutable memory location within a formal access, and is only responsible for maintaining its invariants during that access, so the move-only address checker does not need to, and should not, observe operations that occur outside of the access marked with the mark_must_check instruction. And for immutable memory locations, although there are no explicit formal accesses, that's because every access must be read-only, so although individual accesses are not delimited, they are all compatible as far as move-only checking is concerned. So we can back out the changes to SILGen to re-project a memory location from its origin on every access, a change which breaks invariants assumed by other SIL passes.

Main PR: #64850

rdar://106204488

Code can only locally interact with a mutable memory location within a
formal access, and is only responsible for maintaining its invariants
during that access, so the move-only address checker does not need to,
and should not, observe operations that occur outside of the access
marked with the `mark_must_check` instruction. And for immutable
memory locations, although there are no explicit formal accesses, that's
because every access must be read-only, so although individual
accesses are not delimited, they are all compatible as far as
move-only checking is concerned. So we can back out the changes to SILGen
to re-project a memory location from its origin on every access, a
change which breaks invariants assumed by other SIL passes.
@jckarter jckarter requested a review from a team as a code owner April 3, 2023 16:29
@jckarter
Copy link
Contributor Author

jckarter commented Apr 3, 2023

@swift-ci Please test

@jckarter jckarter merged commit 6fd7229 into swiftlang:release/5.9 Apr 3, 2023
@AnthonyLatsis AnthonyLatsis added the 🍒 release cherry pick Flag: Release branch cherry picks label May 3, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
🍒 release cherry pick Flag: Release branch cherry picks
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants