I am going to be adding support to passes for emitting IsolationHistory behind a
flag. As part of this, we need to store the state of the partition that created
the error when the error is emitted. A partition stores heap memory so it makes
sense to make these types noncopyable types so we just move the heap memory
rather than copying it all over the place.
We want 'inout sending' parameters to have the semantics that not only are they
disconnected on return from the function but additionally they are guaranteed to
be in their own disconnected region on return. This implies that we must emit
errors when an 'inout sending' parameter or any element that is in the same
region as the current value within an 'inout sending' parameter is
returned. This commit contains a new diagnostic for RegionIsolation that adds
specific logic for detecting and emitting errors in these situations.
To implement this, we introduce 3 new diagnostics with each individual
diagnostic being slightly different to reflect the various ways that this error
can come up in source:
* Returning 'inout sending' directly:
```swift
func returnInOutSendingDirectly(_ x: inout sending NonSendableKlass) -> NonSendableKlass {
return x // expected-warning {{cannot return 'inout sending' parameter 'x' from global function 'returnInOutSendingDirectly'}}
// expected-note @-1 {{returning 'x' risks concurrent access since caller assumes that 'x' and the result of global function 'returnInOutSendingDirectly' can be safely sent to different isolation domains}}
}
```
* Returning a value in the same region as an 'inout sending' parameter. E.x.:
```swift
func returnInOutSendingRegionVar(_ x: inout sending NonSendableKlass) -> NonSendableKlass {
var y = x
y = x
return y // expected-warning {{cannot return 'y' from global function 'returnInOutSendingRegionVar'}}
// expected-note @-1 {{returning 'y' risks concurrent access to 'inout sending' parameter 'x' since the caller assumes that 'x' and the result of global function 'returnInOutSendingRegionVar' can be safely sent to different isolation domains}}
}
```
* Returning the result of a function or computed property that is in the same
region as the 'inout parameter'.
```swift
func returnInOutSendingViaHelper(_ x: inout sending NonSendableKlass) -> NonSendableKlass {
let y = x
return useNonSendableKlassAndReturn(y) // expected-warning {{cannot return result of global function 'useNonSendableKlassAndReturn' from global function 'returnInOutSendingViaHelper'}}
// expected-note @-1 {{returning result of global function 'useNonSendableKlassAndReturn' risks concurrent access to 'inout sending' parameter 'x' since the caller assumes that 'x' and the result of global function 'returnInOutSendingViaHelper' can be safely sent to different isolation domains}}
}
```
Additionally, I had to introduce a specific variant for each of these
diagnostics for cases where due to us being in a method, we are actually in our
caller causing the 'inout sending' parameter to be in the same region as an
actor isolated value:
* Returning 'inout sending' directly:
```swift
extension MyActor {
func returnInOutSendingDirectly(_ x: inout sending NonSendableKlass) -> NonSendableKlass {
return x // expected-warning {{cannot return 'inout sending' parameter 'x' from instance method 'returnInOutSendingDirectly'}}
// expected-note @-1 {{returning 'x' risks concurrent access since caller assumes that 'x' is not actor-isolated and the result of instance method 'returnInOutSendingDirectly' is 'self'-isolated}}
}
}
```
* Returning a value in the same region as an 'inout sending' parameter. E.x.:
```swift
extension MyActor {
func returnInOutSendingRegionLet(_ x: inout sending NonSendableKlass) -> NonSendableKlass {
let y = x
return y // expected-warning {{cannot return 'y' from instance method 'returnInOutSendingRegionLet'}}
// expected-note @-1 {{returning 'y' risks concurrent access to 'inout sending' parameter 'x' since the caller assumes that 'x' is not actor-isolated and the result of instance method 'returnInOutSendingRegionLet' is 'self'-isolated}}
}
}
```
* Returning the result of a function or computed property that is in the same region as the 'inout parameter'.
```swift
extension MyActor {
func returnInOutSendingViaHelper(_ x: inout sending NonSendableKlass) -> NonSendableKlass {
let y = x
return useNonSendableKlassAndReturn(y) // expected-warning {{cannot return result of global function 'useNonSendableKlassAndReturn' from instance method 'returnInOutSendingViaHelper'; this is an error in the Swift 6 language mode}}
// expected-note @-1 {{returning result of global function 'useNonSendableKlassAndReturn' risks concurrent access to 'inout sending' parameter 'x' since the caller assumes that 'x' is not actor-isolated and the result of instance method 'returnInOutSendingViaHelper' is 'self'-isolated}}
}
}
```
To implement this, I used two different approaches depending on whether or not
the returned value was generic or not.
* Concrete
In the case where we had a concrete value, I was able to in simple cases emit
diagnostics based off of the values returned by the return inst. In cases where
we phied together results due to multiple results in the same function, we
determine which of the incoming phied values caused the error by grabbing the
exit partition information of each of the incoming value predecessors and seeing
if an InOutSendingAtFunctionExit would emit an error.
* Generic
In the case of generic code, it is a little more interesting since the result is
a value stored in an our parameter instead of being a value directly returned by
a return inst. To work around this, I use PrunedLiveness to determine the last
values stored into the out parameter in the function to avoid having to do a
full dataflow. Then I take the exit blocks where we assign each of those values
and run the same check as we do in the direct phi case to emit the appropriate
error.
rdar://152454571
Specifically, I am refactoring out the code that converts actor/Optional<any
Actor> to an executor in preparation for adding code to LowerHopToExecutor that
handles Builtin.ImplicitIsolationActor.
The only actual functional change is that I made getExecutorForOptionalActor
support being invoked when generating code (i.e. when its SILBuilder has an
insertion point at the end of the block). It previously assumed that it would
always have a real SILInstruction as an insertion point. The changes can be seen
in the places where we now check if the insertion point equals the end of a
block. Its very minor and due to conditional control flow doesn't have any
actual impact given the manner that the code today is generated. This came up in
a subsequent commit when I reuse this code to generate a helper function for
converting Builtin.ImplicitIsolationActor to Builtin.Executor.
When Embedded Swift emits a symbol that was imported from another
module, ensure that the symbol is emitted as a weak definition. This
way, importing the same module (and using its symbol) into several
different modules doesn't cause duplicate-symbol errors at link time.
Rather, the linker will merge the different symbol definitions. This
makes Embedded Swift libraries work without resorting to
`-mergeable-symbols` or `-emit-empty-object-file`.
Specifically:
1. We assume in nonisolated(nonsending) that we are already on the relevant
actor. This lets us always eliminate the initial hop_to_executor.
2. We stopped treating nonisolated(nonsending) functions as suspension points
since we are guaranteed to always be on the same actor when we enter/return.
3. Now that nonisolated(nonsending) is no longer a suspension point, I could
sink the needs executor nonisolated(nonsending) specific code into the needs
executor code. For those unfamiliar it is that we: a. treat a
nonisolated(nonsending) callee as a needs executor since we are no longer
guaranteed to hop in callees and b. treat returns from nonisolated(nonsending)
functions as being a needs executor instruction since we are no longer
guaranteed to hop in the caller after such a function returns.
rdar://155465878
Updates ConsumeOperatorCopyableValuesChecker to identify store_borrow
instructions as a liveness-affecting use so that patterns that would
previously slip through undiagnosed are correctly identified. e.g.
```swift
func use<V>(_ v: borrowing V) {}
func f() {
let a = A()
_ = consume a
use(a) // previously would not be diagnosed
}
```
Specifically for 6.2, we are making optimize hop to executor more conservative
around caller isolation inheriting functions. This means that we are:
1. No longer treating calls to caller isolation inheriting functions as having a
hop in their prologue. In terms of this pass, it means that when determining
dead hop to executors, we no longer think that a caller isolation inheriting
function means that an earlier hop to executor is not required.
2. Treating returns from caller isolation inheriting callees as requiring a
hop. The reason why we are doing this is that we can no longer assume that our
caller will hop after we return.
Post 6.2, there are three main changes we are going to make:
* Forward Dataflow
Caller isolation inheriting functions will no longer be treated as suspension
points meaning that we will be able to propagate hops over them and can assume
that we know the actor that we are on when we enter the function. Practically
this means that trees of calls that involve just nonisolated(nonsending) async
functions will avoid /all/ hop to executor calls since we will be able to
eliminate all of them since the dataflow will just propagate forward from the
entrance that we are already on the actor.
* Backwards Dataflow
A caller isolation inheriting call site will still cause preceding
hop_to_executor functions to be live. This is because we need to ensure that we
are on the caller isolation inheriting actor before we hit the call site. If we
are already on that actor, the hop will be eliminated by the forward pass. But
if the hop has not been eliminated, then the hop must be needed to return us to
the appropriate actor.
We will also keep the behavior that returns from a caller isolation inheriting
function are considered to keep hop to executors alive. If we were able to
propagate to a hop to executor before the return inst with the forward dataflow,
then we know that we are guaranteed to still be on the relevant actor. If the
hop to executor is still there, then we need it to ensure that our caller can
treat the caller isolation inheriting function as a non-suspension point.
rdar://155905383
These features are baseline features and therefore are considered to be
implicitly enabled. They don't need to be explicitly enabled or queried for in
any part of the compiler.
No update is needed for the values they produce. This pass should
really be refactored not to crash on instructions that aren't explicitly
listed or at least not to compile if not every instruction is listed.
rdar://155059418
When we introduce isolation due to a (potential) isolated conformance,
keep track of the protocol to which the conformance could be
introduced. Use this information for two reasons:
1. Downgrade the error to a warning in Swift < 7, because we are newly
diagnosing these
2. Add a note indicating where the isolated conformance could be introduced.
I am doing this so that I can change how we emit the diagnostics just for
SendNonSendable depending on if NonisolatedNonsendingByDefault is enabled
without touching the rest of the compiler.
This does not actually change any of the actual output though.
Handle the presence of mark_dependence instructions after a begin_apply.
Fixes a compiler crash:
"copy of noncopyable typed value. This is a compiler bug. ..."
Extract the special pattern matching logic that is otherwise unrelated to the
check() function. This makes it obvious that the implementation was failing to
set the 'changed' flag whenever needed.
The reason I am doing this is that we have gotten reports about certain test
cases where we are emitting errors about self being captured in isolated
closures where the sourceloc is invalid. The reason why this happened is that
the decl returned by getIsolationCrossing did not have a SourceLoc since self
was being used implicitly.
In this commit I fix that issue by using SIL level information instead of AST
level information. This guarantees that we get an appropriate SourceLoc. As an
additional benefit, this fixed some extant errors where due to some sort of bug
in the AST, we were saying that a value was nonisolated when it was actor
isolated in some of the error msgs.
rdar://151955519
Defer visiting an instruction until its operands have been visited. Otherwise,
this pass will crash during ownership verification with invalid operand
ownership.
Fixes rdar://152879038 ([moveonly] MoveOnlyWrappedTypeEliminator ownership
verifier crashes on @_addressableSelf)
We are going to need to add more flags to the various checked cast
instructions. Generalize the CastingIsolatedConformances bit in all of
these SIL instructions to an "options" struct that's easier to extend.
Precursor to rdar://152335805.
Consider an `@_alwaysEmitIntoClient` function and a custom derivative
defined
for it. Previously, such a combination resulted different errors under
different
circumstances.
Sometimes, there were linker errors due to missing derivative function
symbol -
these occurred when we tried to find the derivative in a module, while
it
should have been emitted into client's code (and it did not happen).
Sometimes, there were SIL verification failures like this:
```
SIL verification failed: internal/private function cannot be serialized or serializable: !F->isAnySerialized() || embedded
```
Linkage and serialization options for the derivative were not handled
properly,
and, instead of PublicNonABI linkage, we had Private one which is
unsupported
for serialization - but we need to serialize `@_alwaysEmitIntoClient`
functions
so the client's code is able to see them.
This patch resolves the issue and adds proper handling of custom
derivatives
of `@_alwaysEmitIntoClient` functions. Note that either both the
function and
its custom derivative or none of them should have
`@_alwaysEmitIntoClient`
attribute, mismatch in this attribute is not supported.
The following cases are handled (assume that in each case client's code
uses
the derivative).
1. Both the function and its derivative are defined in a single file in
one module.
2. Both the function and its derivative are defined in different files
which
are compiled to a single module.
3. The function is defined in one module, its derivative is defined in
another
module.
4. The function and the derivative are defined as members of a protocol
extension in two separate modules - one for the function and one for the
derivative. A struct conforming the protocol is defined in the third
module.
5. The function and the derivative are defined as members of a struct
extension in two separate modules - one for the function and one for the
derivative.
The changes allow to define derivatives for methods of `SIMD`.
Fixes#54445
<!--
If this pull request is targeting a release branch, please fill out the
following form:
https://github.com/swiftlang/.github/blob/main/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE/release.md?plain=1
Otherwise, replace this comment with a description of your changes and
rationale. Provide links to external references/discussions if
appropriate.
If this pull request resolves any GitHub issues, link them like so:
Resolves <link to issue>, resolves <link to another issue>.
For more information about linking a pull request to an issue, see:
https://docs.github.com/issues/tracking-your-work-with-issues/linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue
-->
<!--
Before merging this pull request, you must run the Swift continuous
integration tests.
For information about triggering CI builds via @swift-ci, see:
https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/main/docs/ContinuousIntegration.md#swift-ci
Thank you for your contribution to Swift!
-->
This prevents simplification and SILCombine passes to remove (alive) `mark_dependence_addr`.
The instruction is conceptually equivalent to
```
%v = load %addr
%d = mark_dependence %v on %base
store %d to %addr
```
Therefore the address operand has to be defined as writing to the address.
It is like `zeroInitializer`, but does not actually initialize the memory.
It only indicates to mandatory passes that the memory is going to be initialized.
When the called closure throws an error, it needs to clean up the buffer.
This means that the buffer is uninitialized at this point.
We need an `end_lifetime` so that the move-only checker doesn't insert a wrong `destroy_addr` because it thinks that the buffer is initialized.
Fixes a mis-compile.
rdar://151461109
Apply the MoveOnlyAddressChecker change from
https://github.com/swiftlang/swift/pull/73358 to the
MoveOnly[Value]Checker.
After 7713eef817, before running value
checking, all lifetimes in the function are completed. That doesn't
quite work because lifetime completion expects not to encounter
reborrows or their adjacent phis.
rdar://151325025
