interpret/miri: call the panic_nounwind machinery the same way codegen does

[RalfJung]

No description provided.

[rustbot]

r? @fee1-dead

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

[rustbot]

Some changes occurred to the CTFE / Miri engine

cc @rust-lang/miri

Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations

cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_cranelift

cc @bjorn3

This PR changes Stable MIR

cc @oli-obk, @celinval, @spastorino

This PR changes MIR

cc @oli-obk, @RalfJung, @JakobDegen, @davidtwco, @celinval, @vakaras

The Miri subtree was changed

cc @rust-lang/miri

[rustbot]

Some changes occurred in src/tools/clippy

cc @rust-lang/clippy

Some changes occurred in src/tools/rust-analyzer

cc @rust-lang/rust-analyzer

[RalfJung]

Hm I didn't want to factor out the first commit (rename unwind-related MIR terminators to clarify their purpose) since it would have conflicted with the rest, but maybe I should have... oh well.

[fee1-dead]

LGTM, I think leaving the strings as is is fine (maybe a followup) since it would change mir-opt tests.

[fee1-dead]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 4ea62dd382617244509c7269c52b42aba700cec0 has been approved by fee1-dead

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[RalfJung]

@bors r-
I did adjust the printing logic. Let's see if CI is happy. mir-opt blessing didn't produce a diff...

[RalfJung]

@bors r=fee1-dead

[bors]

📌 Commit d3e539956c32182829afb2dfa52541d0f8ae239a has been approved by fee1-dead

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #113124) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 49b5701 with merge 15808aaf5539142974b710017bfd95236943704b...

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[RalfJung]

@rust-lang/rust-analyzer something odd is happening. RA is failing to build on the dist-riscv64-linux builder, but it checks successfully locally. The build errors indicate that it is importing a version of rustc from before this PR. What is going on there?

Building stage1 tool rust-analyzer (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> riscv64gc-unknown-linux-gnu)
[...]
  error[E0599]: no variant or associated item named `UnwindResume` found for enum `mir::TerminatorKind` in the current scope
     --> crates/hir-ty/src/mir/borrowck.rs:163:35
      |
  163 |                 | TerminatorKind::UnwindResume
      |                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^ variant or associated item not found in `TerminatorKind`
      |
     ::: crates/hir-ty/src/mir.rs:346:1

[RalfJung]

Ah, actually ./x.py check rust-analyzer also fails locally. I though I had done this. Is RA not covered by PR CI?
And why doesn't it pick up the changes from this PR?!?

[RalfJung]

Oh wait. These are complete copies of the rustc types it seems? Ugh yeah then my search-and-replace would have gone wrong.^^

[RalfJung]

Okay so the only really odd thing is that I changed files in src/tools/rust-analyzer and yet PR CI didn't even check if RA still builds.

@bors r=fee1-dead

[bors]

📌 Commit 0277351 has been approved by fee1-dead

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[lnicola]

Yeah, we don't depend on the rustc crates, with a couple of exceptions. It's okay to have this in here, but most RA changes are supposed to go through upstream unless they really depend on something in this repo (i.e. the proc macro server).

[RalfJung]

most RA changes are supposed to go through upstream unless they really depend on something in this repo (i.e. the proc macro server).

Ah, sorry. It looked like the rustc types so I assumed I did have to patch them to get things to build again.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 0277351 with merge 5c6a7e7...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: fee1-dead
Pushing 5c6a7e7 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (5c6a7e7): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.6%	[-2.6%, -2.6%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 636.088s -> 635.074s (-0.16%)
Artifact size: 346.98 MiB -> 346.88 MiB (-0.03%)