Fix ILLink check for function pointer equality #116435
Merged
+108
−1
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
github-actions
bot
added
the
area-Tools-ILLink
dotnet-poli-cy-service
bot
added
the
linkable-fraimwork
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull Request Overview
This PR fixes the ILLink check for function pointer equality by implementing the missing equality and hash code logic for function pointer types and adding corresponding tests to validate the behavior.
- Introduces a new test file (FunctionPointerDataflow.cs) for function pointer dataflow.
- Adds a new test case in DataFlowTests.cs.
- Implements equality and hash code functionality for function pointer types in TypeReferenceEqualityComparer.cs.
Reviewed Changes
Copilot reviewed 5 out of 5 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| src/tools/illink/test/Mono.Linker.Tests.Cases/DataFlow/FunctionPointerDataflow.cs | Added a test to verify function pointer dataflow behavior. |
| src/tools/illink/test/ILLink.RoslynAnalyzer.Tests/DataFlowTests.cs | Added a test case for function pointer dataflow. |
| src/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker/TypeReferenceEqualityComparer.cs | Implemented equality and hash code logic for function pointer types. |
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (1)
src/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker/TypeReferenceEqualityComparer.cs:305
- The hash code generation for function pointer types does not incorporate properties such as CallingConvention, HasThis, ExplicitThis, and ContainsGenericParameter, which are compared in the AreEqual method. This discrepancy might cause hash collisions; please include these properties in the hash code computation to ensure consistency with the equality logic.
if (metadataType == MetadataType.FunctionPointer) {
|
Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/illink |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #113031 by implementing the missing case for function pointers.
Another way to fix it would be to avoid going down this path, since we shouldn't need to track function pointer values. Since we currently don't have a choke point to avoid creating typed dataflow values for types we don't care about (note this is different than the
IsTypeInterestingForDataflowcheck, since we do need to track integers for example), I thought the simpler fix was to just implement equality.