Skip to content

[compiler] fix false positive "mutate frozen" validation with refs #33993

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

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jul 25, 2025

Conversation

josephsavona
Copy link
Member

@josephsavona josephsavona commented Jul 25, 2025

The test case here previously reported a "Cannot modify local variables after render completes" error (from ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions). This happens because one of the functions passed to a hook clearly mutates a ref — except that we try to ignore mutations of refs! The problem in this case is that the const ref = ... was getting converted to a context variable since the ref is accessed in a function before its declaration. We don't infer types for context variables at all, and our ref handling is based on types, so we failed to ignore this ref mutation.

The fix is to recognize that StoreLocal const ... is a special case: the variable may be referenced in code before the declaration, but at runtime it's either a TDZ error or the variable will have the type from the declaration. So we can safely infer a type.


Stack created with Sapling. Best reviewed with ReviewStack.

Fixes two related cases of mutation of potentially frozen values.

The first is method calls on frozen values. Previously, we modeled unknown function calls as potentially aliasing their receiver+args into the return value. If the receiver or argument were known to be frozen, then we would downgrade the `Alias` effect into an `ImmutableCapture`. However, within a function expression it's possible to call a function using a frozen value as an argument (that gets `Alias`-ed into the return) but where we don't have the context locally to know that the value is frozen.

This results in cases like this:

```js
const frozen = useContext(...);
useEffect(() => {
  frozen.method().property = true;
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ cannot mutate frozen value
}, [...]);
```

Within the function we would infer:

```
t0 = MethodCall ...
  Create t0 = mutable
  Alias t0 <- frozen
t1 = PropertyStore ...
  Mutate t0
```

And then transitively infer the function expression as having a `Mutate 'frozen'` effect, which when evaluated against the outer context (`frozen` is frozen) is an error.

The fix is to model unknown function calls as _maybe_ aliasing their receiver/args in the return, and then considering mutations of a maybe-aliased value to only be a conditional mutation of the source:


```
t0 = MethodCall ...
  Create t0 = mutable
  MaybeAlias t0 <- frozen // maybe alias now
t1 = PropertyStore ...
  Mutate t0
```

Then, the `Mutate t0` turns into a `MutateConditional 'frozen'`, which just gets ignored when we process the outer context.

The second, related fix is for known mutation of phis that may be a frozen value. The previous inference model correctly recorded these as errors, the new model does not. We now correctly report a validation error for this case in the new model.
The test case here previously reported a "Cannot modify local variables after render completes" error (from ValidateNoFreezingKnownMutableFunctions). This happens because one of the functions passed to a hook clearly mutates a ref — except that we try to ignore mutations of refs! The problem in this case is that the `const ref = ...` was getting converted to a context variable since the ref is accessed in a function before its declaration. We don't infer types for context variables at all, and our ref handling is based on types, so we failed to ignore this ref mutation.

The fix is to recognize that `StoreLocal const ...` is a special case: the variable may be referenced in code before the declaration, but at runtime it's either a TDZ error or the variable will have the type from the declaration. So we can safely infer a type.
Copy link
Contributor

@mofeiZ mofeiZ left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ohhh very nice!!

josephsavona added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 25, 2025
#33984)

Fixes two related cases of mutation of potentially frozen values.

The first is method calls on frozen values. Previously, we modeled
unknown function calls as potentially aliasing their receiver+args into
the return value. If the receiver or argument were known to be frozen,
then we would downgrade the `Alias` effect into an `ImmutableCapture`.
However, within a function expression it's possible to call a function
using a frozen value as an argument (that gets `Alias`-ed into the
return) but where we don't have the context locally to know that the
value is frozen.

This results in cases like this:

```js
const frozen = useContext(...);
useEffect(() => {
  frozen.method().property = true;
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ cannot mutate frozen value
}, [...]);
```

Within the function we would infer:

```
t0 = MethodCall ...
  Create t0 = mutable
  Alias t0 <- frozen
t1 = PropertyStore ...
  Mutate t0
```

And then transitively infer the function expression as having a `Mutate
'frozen'` effect, which when evaluated against the outer context
(`frozen` is frozen) is an error.

The fix is to model unknown function calls as _maybe_ aliasing their
receiver/args in the return, and then considering mutations of a
maybe-aliased value to only be a conditional mutation of the source:


```
t0 = MethodCall ...
  Create t0 = mutable
  MaybeAlias t0 <- frozen // maybe alias now
t1 = PropertyStore ...
  Mutate t0
```

Then, the `Mutate t0` turns into a `MutateConditional 'frozen'`, which
just gets ignored when we process the outer context.

The second, related fix is for known mutation of phis that may be a
frozen value. The previous inference model correctly recorded these as
errors, the new model does not. We now correctly report a validation
error for this case in the new model.

---
[//]: # (BEGIN SAPLING FOOTER)
Stack created with [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com). Best reviewed
with [ReviewStack](https://reviewstack.dev/facebook/react/pull/33984).
* #33993
* #33991
* __->__ #33984
josephsavona added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 25, 2025
---
[//]: # (BEGIN SAPLING FOOTER)
Stack created with [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com). Best reviewed
with [ReviewStack](https://reviewstack.dev/facebook/react/pull/33991).
* #33993
* __->__ #33991
* #33984
@josephsavona josephsavona merged commit 2aa5f9d into main Jul 25, 2025
21 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CLA Signed React Core Team Opened by a member of the React Core Team
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants