Don't treat dependent types as having a copy value representation. (#6055)

Add `Dependent` value and initializing representations for types whose
representations are unknown because they are dependent. When generating
SemIR in such cases, use a worst-case initializing representation that
both provides a destination address and also propagates a potential
result value.

Use this to fix incorrect lowering and lowering crashes for specific
functions involving generic types that don't use a copy value
representation.

In lowering, be careful to distinguish between whether the initializing
representation for the generic return type uses a return slot (which
affects whether the SemIR declaration and call have one) and whether the
initializing representation for the specific return type uses a return
slot (which affects whether the LLVM IR declaration and call have one).
This commit is contained in:
Richard Smith
2025-09-15 23:59:00 +00:00
committed by GitHub
parent ca40e9d693
commit b44ba47cf3
53 changed files with 1375 additions and 670 deletions
+8
View File
@@ -522,8 +522,16 @@ auto HandleInst(FunctionContext& context, SemIR::InstId inst_id,
std::vector<llvm::Value*> args;
auto inst_type = context.GetTypeIdOfInst(inst_id);
bool call_has_return_slot =
SemIR::ReturnTypeInfo::ForType(context.sem_ir(), inst.type_id)
.has_return_slot();
if (context.GetReturnTypeInfo(inst_type).info.has_return_slot()) {
CARBON_CHECK(call_has_return_slot);
args.push_back(context.GetValue(arg_ids.consume_back()));
} else if (call_has_return_slot) {
// Call instruction has a return slot but this specific callee does not.
// Just ignore it.
arg_ids.consume_back();
}
for (auto arg_id : arg_ids) {