compiler: Enhance detect_accesses and patch symbolic padding

[FabioLuporini]

Test in PRO in the PR/branch with same name as this one

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 51.61290% with 30 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 61.54%. Comparing base (bd39274) to head (63b23b5).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
devito/symbolics/extended_sympy.py	43.47%	13 Missing ⚠️
devito/types/parallel.py	66.66%	7 Missing ⚠️
devito/types/basic.py	0.00%	5 Missing ⚠️
devito/ir/cgen/printer.py	25.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
devito/ir/support/utils.py	80.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
devito/passes/iet/misc.py	75.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (bd39274) and HEAD (63b23b5). Click for more details.

HEAD has 28 uploads less than BASE

Flag	BASE (bd39274)	HEAD (63b23b5)
	18	1
pytest-gpu-gcc-	6	0
pytest-gpu-icx-	3	0
pytest-gpu-aomp-amdgpuX	1	0
pytest-gpu-nvc-nvidiaX	1	0

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2886       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   83.43%   61.54%   -21.90%     
===========================================
  Files         248      193       -55     
  Lines       51381    31465    -19916     
  Branches     4431     3805      -626     
===========================================
- Hits        42871    19364    -23507     
- Misses       7757    11157     +3400     
- Partials      753      944      +191     

Flag	Coverage Δ
pytest-gpu-aomp-amdgpuX	?
pytest-gpu-gcc-	?
pytest-gpu-icx-	?
pytest-gpu-nvc-nvidiaX	?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[mloubout]

This look very specific and seems like that's something retrieve_index should catch

[FabioLuporini]

the idea is that other objects can end up there, in the future, maybe...

as for retrieve_indexed catching it: disagree, it's not an implicit Indexed, it's rarther a logical representation of the base address of the TensorMove -- as an Indexed, for homogeneity