fix: don't panic on volatile access to null

According to
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-volatile-access-to-non-dereferenceable-memory-may-be-well-defined/86303/4,
LLVM allows volatile operations on null and handles it correctly. This
should be allowed in Rust as well, because I/O memory may be hard-coded
to address 0 in some cases, like the AVR chip ATtiny1626.

Author: LuigiPiucco

library/core/src/ptr/mod.rs

@@ -1813,12 +1813,11 @@ pub unsafe fn read_volatile<T>(src: *const T) -> T {
     unsafe {
         ub_checks::assert_unsafe_precondition!(
             check_language_ub,
-            "ptr::read_volatile requires that the pointer argument is aligned and non-null",
+            "ptr::read_volatile requires that the pointer argument is aligned",
             (
                 addr: *const () = src as *const (),
                 align: usize = align_of::<T>(),
-                is_zst: bool = T::IS_ZST,
-            ) => ub_checks::maybe_is_aligned_and_not_null(addr, align, is_zst)
+            ) => ub_checks::maybe_is_aligned(addr, align)
         );
         intrinsics::volatile_load(src)
     }
@@ -1893,12 +1892,11 @@ pub unsafe fn write_volatile<T>(dst: *mut T, src: T) {
     unsafe {
         ub_checks::assert_unsafe_precondition!(
             check_language_ub,
-            "ptr::write_volatile requires that the pointer argument is aligned and non-null",
+            "ptr::write_volatile requires that the pointer argument is aligned",
             (
                 addr: *mut () = dst as *mut (),
                 align: usize = align_of::<T>(),
-                is_zst: bool = T::IS_ZST,
-            ) => ub_checks::maybe_is_aligned_and_not_null(addr, align, is_zst)
+            ) => ub_checks::maybe_is_aligned(addr, align)
         );
         intrinsics::volatile_store(dst, src);
     }

library/core/src/ub_checks.rs

@@ -129,6 +129,28 @@ pub(crate) const fn maybe_is_aligned_and_not_null(
     )
 }
 
+/// Checks whether `ptr` is properly aligned with respect to the given alignment.
+///
+/// In `const` this is approximate and can fail spuriously. It is primarily intended
+/// for `assert_unsafe_precondition!` with `check_language_ub`, in which case the
+/// check is anyway not executed in `const`.
+#[inline]
+#[rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable(const_eval_select)]
+pub(crate) const fn maybe_is_aligned(
+    ptr: *const (),
+    align: usize,
+) -> bool {
+    // This is just for safety checks so we can const_eval_select.
+    const_eval_select!(
+        @capture { ptr: *const (), align: usize } -> bool:
+        if const {
+            true
+        } else {
+            ptr.is_aligned_to(align)
+        }
+    )
+}
+
 #[inline]
 pub(crate) const fn is_valid_allocation_size(size: usize, len: usize) -> bool {
     let max_len = if size == 0 { usize::MAX } else { isize::MAX as usize / size };