[region-isolation] A few improvements + If a value is dynamically actor isolated, do not consider it transferred if the transfer statically was to that same actor isolation. #72583
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
…the full value state of the value instead of just the representative. Just makes it easier to debug.
…d of "GlobalActor" for its custom global actor. Just makes it easier to read. NFC.
… of a never transferrable value, use the dynamic isolation. Do not assume it is task isolated. rdar://125372336
… capture by an isolated closure diagnostic to be a named diagnostic. rdar://125372790
…onsider it transferred if the transfer statically was to that same actor isolation. This issue can come up when a value is initially statically disconnected, but after we performed dataflow, we discovered that it was actually actor isolated at the transfer point, implying that we are not actually transferring. Example: ```swift @mainactor func testGlobalAndGlobalIsolatedPartialApplyMatch2() { var ns = (NonSendableKlass(), NonSendableKlass()) // Regions: (ns.0, ns.1), {(mainActorIsolatedGlobal), @mainactor} ns.0 = mainActorIsolatedGlobal // Regions: {(ns.0, ns.1, mainActorIsolatedGlobal), @mainactor} // This is not a transfer since ns is already main actor isolated. let _ = { @mainactor in print(ns) } useValue(ns) } ``` To do this, I also added to SILFunction an actor isolation that SILGen puts on the SILFunction during pre function visitation. We don't print it or serialize it for now. rdar://123474616
…ely the same isolation as the transfer inst. To be more specific this means that either: 1. The use is actually isolated to the same actor. This could mean that the use is global actor isolated to the same function. 2. The use is nonisolated but is executing within a function that is globally isolated to the same isolation domain. rdar://123474616
gottesmm
requested review from
ktoso,
hborla,
slavapestov and
xedin
as code owners
|
@swift-ci smoke test |
|
Forgot to disable error squelching in the unit tests which do not have access to the functionality |
|
@swift-ci smoke test |
To squelch errors, we need access to functionality not available in the unittests. The unittests do not require this functionality anyways, so just disable squelching during the unittests.
|
@swift-ci smoke test |
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.
This PR contains a few different changes that build on each other to solve rdar://123474616 (the title problem of the radar). Specifically (ignoring a test fix change):