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

Fix ICE monomorphize collection encountered polymorphic constant #114985

Closed

Conversation

chenyukang
Copy link
Member

Fixes #114484

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Aug 19, 2023

r? @TaKO8Ki

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

@rustbot 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 19, 2023
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member

@chenyukang
Copy link
Member Author

chenyukang commented Aug 19, 2023

#105249

Seems this is a regression case that we need fix from the root cause, instead of covering the errors.

@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

Also, this needs a very detailed explanation why it's correct. Adding a new fatal during codegen doesn't seem right, especially without the generic_const_exprs feature being enabled.

@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

This is an overflow error:

error: internal compiler error: compiler/rustc_monomorphize/src/collector.rs:723:54: collection encountered polymorphic constant: Unevaluated(UnevaluatedConst { def: DefId(0:31 ~ example[ba99]::virtualize_my_trait::{impl#0}::LEVELS), args: [VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<VirtualWrapper<SomeData<256>, 0>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>, 1>], promoted: None }, [*const (); 2])

So even if we are gonna fatally error here, the wording needs to explain that it's an overflow, not just "polymorphic".

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 5, 2023

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #115553) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@chenyukang chenyukang closed this Oct 8, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
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.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Compiler panic on recursion limit finding the struct tail
6 participants