-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.8k
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
Do not fire unhandled attribute assertion on multi-segment AttributeType::Normal
attributes with builtin attribute as first segment
#128623
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
…d" assertion ICE See <rust-lang#128622>.
PR rust-lang#128581 introduced an assertion that all builtin attributes are actually checked via `CheckAttrVisitor` and aren't accidentally usable on completely unrelated HIR nodes. Unfortunately, the check had correctness problems. The match on attribute path segments looked like ```rust,ignore [sym::should_panic] => /* check is implemented */ match BUILTIN_ATTRIBUTE_MAP.get(name) { // checked below Some(BuiltinAttribute { type_: AttributeType::CrateLevel, .. }) => {} Some(_) => { if !name.as_str().starts_with("rustc_") { span_bug!( attr.span, "builtin attribute {name:?} not handled by `CheckAttrVisitor`" ) } } None => (), } ``` However, it failed to account for edge cases such as an attribute whose: 1. path segments *starts* with a builtin attribute such as `should_panic` 2. which does not start with `rustc_`, and 3. is also an `AttributeType::Normal` attribute upon registration with the builtin attribute map These conditions when all satisfied cause the span bug to be issued for e.g. `#[should_panic::skip]` because the `[sym::should_panic]` arm is not matched (since it's `[sym::should_panic, sym::skip]`). See <rust-lang#128622>.
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
T-compiler
Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
labels
Aug 4, 2024
jieyouxu
changed the title
Do not fire unhandled attribute assertion on multi-segment
Do not fire unhandled attribute assertion on multi-segment Aug 4, 2024
AttributeType::CrateLevel
attributes with builtin attribute as first segmentAttributeType::Normal
attributes with builtin attribute as first segment
@bors r+ |
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
Aug 4, 2024
matthiaskrgr
added a commit
to matthiaskrgr/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 5, 2024
…cote Do not fire unhandled attribute assertion on multi-segment `AttributeType::Normal` attributes with builtin attribute as first segment ### The Problem In rust-lang#128581 I introduced an assertion to check that all builtin attributes are actually checked via `CheckAttrVisitor` and aren't accidentally usable on completely unrelated HIR nodes. Unfortunately, the assertion had correctness problems as revealed in rust-lang#128622. The match on attribute path segments looked like ```rs,ignore // Normal handler [sym::should_panic] => /* check is implemented */ // Fallback handler [name, ..] => match BUILTIN_ATTRIBUTE_MAP.get(name) { // checked below Some(BuiltinAttribute { type_: AttributeType::CrateLevel, .. }) => {} Some(_) => { if !name.as_str().starts_with("rustc_") { span_bug!( attr.span, "builtin attribute {name:?} not handled by `CheckAttrVisitor`" ) } } None => (), } ``` However, it failed to account for edge cases such as an attribute whose: 1. path segments *starts* with a segment matching the name of a builtin attribute such as `should_panic`, and 2. the first segment's symbol does not start with `rustc_`, and 3. the matched builtin attribute is also of `AttributeType::Normal` attribute type upon registration with the builtin attribute map. These conditions when all satisfied cause the span bug to be issued for e.g. `#[should_panic::skip]` because the `[sym::should_panic]` arm is not matched (since it's `[sym::should_panic, sym::skip]`). ### Proposed Solution This PR tries to remedy that by adjusting all normal/specific handlers to not match exactly on a single segment, but instead match a prefix segment. i.e. ```rs,ignore // Normal handler, notice the `, ..` rest pattern [sym::should_panic, ..] => /* check is implemented */ // Fallback handler [name, ..] => match BUILTIN_ATTRIBUTE_MAP.get(name) { // checked below Some(BuiltinAttribute { type_: AttributeType::CrateLevel, .. }) => {} Some(_) => { if !name.as_str().starts_with("rustc_") { span_bug!( attr.span, "builtin attribute {name:?} not handled by `CheckAttrVisitor`" ) } } None => (), } ``` ### Review Remarks This PR contains 2 commits: 1. The first commit adds a regression test. This will ICE without the `CheckAttrVisitor` changes. 2. The second commit adjusts `CheckAttrVisitor` assertion logic. Once this commit is applied, the test should no longer ICE and produce the expected bless stderr. Fixes rust-lang#128622. r? `@nnethercote` (since you reviewed rust-lang#128581)
This was referenced Aug 5, 2024
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 5, 2024
…iaskrgr Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#127655 (turn `invalid_type_param_default` into a `FutureReleaseErrorReportInDeps`) - rust-lang#127907 (built-in derive: remove BYTE_SLICE_IN_PACKED_STRUCT_WITH_DERIVE hack and lint) - rust-lang#127974 (force compiling std from source if modified) - rust-lang#128309 (Implement cursors for `BTreeSet`) - rust-lang#128500 (Add test for updating enum discriminant through pointer) - rust-lang#128623 (Do not fire unhandled attribute assertion on multi-segment `AttributeType::Normal` attributes with builtin attribute as first segment) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 5, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#128623 - jieyouxu:check-attr-ice, r=nnethercote Do not fire unhandled attribute assertion on multi-segment `AttributeType::Normal` attributes with builtin attribute as first segment ### The Problem In rust-lang#128581 I introduced an assertion to check that all builtin attributes are actually checked via `CheckAttrVisitor` and aren't accidentally usable on completely unrelated HIR nodes. Unfortunately, the assertion had correctness problems as revealed in rust-lang#128622. The match on attribute path segments looked like ```rs,ignore // Normal handler [sym::should_panic] => /* check is implemented */ // Fallback handler [name, ..] => match BUILTIN_ATTRIBUTE_MAP.get(name) { // checked below Some(BuiltinAttribute { type_: AttributeType::CrateLevel, .. }) => {} Some(_) => { if !name.as_str().starts_with("rustc_") { span_bug!( attr.span, "builtin attribute {name:?} not handled by `CheckAttrVisitor`" ) } } None => (), } ``` However, it failed to account for edge cases such as an attribute whose: 1. path segments *starts* with a segment matching the name of a builtin attribute such as `should_panic`, and 2. the first segment's symbol does not start with `rustc_`, and 3. the matched builtin attribute is also of `AttributeType::Normal` attribute type upon registration with the builtin attribute map. These conditions when all satisfied cause the span bug to be issued for e.g. `#[should_panic::skip]` because the `[sym::should_panic]` arm is not matched (since it's `[sym::should_panic, sym::skip]`). ### Proposed Solution This PR tries to remedy that by adjusting all normal/specific handlers to not match exactly on a single segment, but instead match a prefix segment. i.e. ```rs,ignore // Normal handler, notice the `, ..` rest pattern [sym::should_panic, ..] => /* check is implemented */ // Fallback handler [name, ..] => match BUILTIN_ATTRIBUTE_MAP.get(name) { // checked below Some(BuiltinAttribute { type_: AttributeType::CrateLevel, .. }) => {} Some(_) => { if !name.as_str().starts_with("rustc_") { span_bug!( attr.span, "builtin attribute {name:?} not handled by `CheckAttrVisitor`" ) } } None => (), } ``` ### Review Remarks This PR contains 2 commits: 1. The first commit adds a regression test. This will ICE without the `CheckAttrVisitor` changes. 2. The second commit adjusts `CheckAttrVisitor` assertion logic. Once this commit is applied, the test should no longer ICE and produce the expected bless stderr. Fixes rust-lang#128622. r? ``@nnethercote`` (since you reviewed rust-lang#128581)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-bors
Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
T-compiler
Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
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.
The Problem
In #128581 I introduced an assertion to check that all builtin attributes are actually checked via
CheckAttrVisitor
and aren't accidentally usable on completely unrelated HIR nodes.Unfortunately, the assertion had correctness problems as revealed in #128622.
The match on attribute path segments looked like
However, it failed to account for edge cases such as an attribute whose:
should_panic
, andrustc_
, andAttributeType::Normal
attribute type upon registration with the builtin attribute map.These conditions when all satisfied cause the span bug to be issued for e.g.
#[should_panic::skip]
because the[sym::should_panic]
arm is not matched (since it's[sym::should_panic, sym::skip]
).Proposed Solution
This PR tries to remedy that by adjusting all normal/specific handlers to not match exactly on a single segment, but instead match a prefix segment.
i.e.
Review Remarks
This PR contains 2 commits:
CheckAttrVisitor
changes.CheckAttrVisitor
assertion logic. Once this commit is applied, the test should no longer ICE and produce the expected bless stderr.Fixes #128622.
r? @nnethercote (since you reviewed #128581)