Skip to content
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

Drop alloca_zeroed #22969

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 3, 2015
Merged

Drop alloca_zeroed #22969

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 3, 2015

Conversation

dotdash
Copy link
Contributor

@dotdash dotdash commented Mar 2, 2015

Its only user was lvalue_scratch_datum which is called with zero=true
anymore, so it's effectively unused.

Its only user was lvalue_scratch_datum which is called with zero=true
anymore, so it's effectively unused.
@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

r? @huonw

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@nagisa
Copy link
Member

nagisa commented Mar 2, 2015

LGTM.

@huonw
Copy link
Member

huonw commented Mar 2, 2015

@bors r+ f580

Manishearth added a commit to Manishearth/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 3, 2015
 Its only user was lvalue_scratch_datum which is called with zero=true
anymore, so it's effectively unused.
@bors bors merged commit f580412 into rust-lang:master Mar 3, 2015
@dotdash dotdash deleted the no_alloca_zeroed branch May 8, 2015 08:46
Manishearth added a commit to Manishearth/rust that referenced this pull request Jan 14, 2016
…r-issue-30530, r=dotdash

Put back alloca zeroing for issues rust-lang#29092, rust-lang#30018, rust-lang#30530; inject zeroing for rust-lang#30822.

----

Background context: `fn alloca_zeroed` was removed in PR rust-lang#22969, so we haven't been "zero'ing" (\*) the alloca's since at least that point, but the logic behind that PR seems sound, so its not entirely obvious how *long* the underlying bug has actually been present.  In other words, I have not yet done a survey to see when the new `alloc_ty` and `lvalue_scratch_datum` calls were introduced that should have had "zero'ing" the alloca's.

----

I first fixed rust-lang#30018, then decided to do a survey of `alloc_ty` calls to see if they needed similar treatment, which quickly led to a rediscovery of rust-lang#30530.

While making the regression test for the latter, I discovered rust-lang#30822, which is a slightly different bug (in terms of where the "zero'ing" needs to go), but still relevant.

I haven't finished the aforementioned survey of `fn alloc_ty` calls, but I decided I wanted to get this up for review in its current state (namely to see if my attempt to force developers to include a justification for passing `Uninit` can possibly fly, or if I should abandon that path of action).

----

(*): I am putting quotation marks around "zero'ing" because we no longer use zero as our "dropped" marker value.

Fix rust-lang#29092
Fix rust-lang#30018
Fix rust-lang#30530
Fix rust-lang#30822
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants