swap_simple no longer needs to be a separate function

library/core/src/mem/mod.rs

@@ -731,38 +731,6 @@ pub const fn swap<T>(x: &mut T, y: &mut T) {
     unsafe { intrinsics::typed_swap(x, y) }
 }
 
-/// Same as [`swap`] semantically, but always uses the simple implementation.
-///
-/// Used elsewhere in `mem` and `ptr` at the bottom layer of calls.
-#[rustc_const_unstable(feature = "const_swap", issue = "83163")]
-#[inline]
-pub(crate) const fn swap_simple<T>(x: &mut T, y: &mut T) {
-    // We arrange for this to typically be called with small types,
-    // so this reads-and-writes approach is actually better than using
-    // copy_nonoverlapping as it easily puts things in LLVM registers
-    // directly and doesn't end up inlining allocas.
-    // And LLVM actually optimizes it to 3×memcpy if called with
-    // a type larger than it's willing to keep in a register.
-    // Having typed reads and writes in MIR here is also good as
-    // it lets Miri and CTFE understand them better, including things
-    // like enforcing type validity for them.
-    // Importantly, read+copy_nonoverlapping+write introduces confusing
-    // asymmetry to the behaviour where one value went through read+write
-    // whereas the other was copied over by the intrinsic (see #94371).
-    // Furthermore, using only read+write here benefits limited backends
-    // such as SPIR-V that work on an underlying *typed* view of memory,
-    // and thus have trouble with Rust's untyped memory operations.
-
-    // SAFETY: exclusive references are always valid to read/write,
-    // including being aligned, and nothing here panics so it's drop-safe.
-    unsafe {
-        let a = ptr::read(x);
-        let b = ptr::read(y);
-        ptr::write(x, b);
-        ptr::write(y, a);
-    }
-}
-
 /// Replaces `dest` with the default value of `T`, returning the previous `dest` value.
 ///
 /// * If you want to replace the values of two variables, see [`swap`].

library/core/src/ptr/mod.rs

@@ -1062,11 +1062,26 @@ macro_rules! attempt_swap_as_chunks {
     let mut i = 0;
     while i < count {
         // SAFETY: By precondition, `i` is in-bounds because it's below `n`
-        let x = unsafe { &mut *x.add(i) };
+        let x = unsafe { x.add(i) };
         // SAFETY: By precondition, `i` is in-bounds because it's below `n`
         // and it's distinct from `x` since the ranges are non-overlapping
-        let y = unsafe { &mut *y.add(i) };
-        mem::swap_simple::<MaybeUninit<T>>(x, y);
+        let y = unsafe { y.add(i) };
+
+        // If we end up here, it's because we're using a simple type -- like
+        // a small power-of-two-sized thing -- or a special type with particularly
+        // large alignment, particularly SIMD types.
+        // Thus we're fine just reading-and-writing it, as either it's small
+        // and that works well anyway or it's special and the type's author
+        // presumably wanted things to be done in the larger chunk.
+
+        // SAFETY: we're only ever given pointers that are valid to read/write,
+        // including being aligned, and nothing here panics so it's drop-safe.
+        unsafe {
+            let a: MaybeUninit<T> = read(x);
+            let b: MaybeUninit<T> = read(y);
+            write(x, b);
+            write(y, a);
+        }
 
         i += 1;
     }

tests/ui/consts/missing_span_in_backtrace.stderr

@@ -5,8 +5,6 @@ error[E0080]: evaluation of constant value failed
    |
 note: inside `std::ptr::read::<MaybeUninit<MaybeUninit<u8>>>`
   --> $SRC_DIR/core/src/ptr/mod.rs:LL:COL
-note: inside `mem::swap_simple::<MaybeUninit<MaybeUninit<u8>>>`
-  --> $SRC_DIR/core/src/mem/mod.rs:LL:COL
 note: inside `std::ptr::swap_nonoverlapping_simple_untyped::<MaybeUninit<u8>>`
   --> $SRC_DIR/core/src/ptr/mod.rs:LL:COL
 note: inside `swap_nonoverlapping::<MaybeUninit<u8>>`