[Bug][Compiler-v2] MISSING_ACQUIRES_ANNOTATION error in AptosTokenObjects

[rahxephon89]

🐛 Bug

When running V2 against some tests in AptosToken and AptosTokenObjects, the following error will be generated:

┌── test_invalid_update ──────
│ Test did not error as expected. Expected test to abort with code 65537 originating in the module 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001::from_bcs but instead it gave a UNEXPECTED_VERIFIER_ERROR (code 2017) error originating in the module 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000004::property_map rooted here{
│     message: Unexpected verifier/deserialization error! This likely means there is code stored on chain that is unverifiable!
│ Error: VMError { major_status: MISSING_ACQUIRES_ANNOTATION, sub_status: None, message: None, exec_state: None, location: Module(ModuleId { address: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000004, name: Identifier("property_map") }), indices: [(FunctionDefinition, 11)], offsets: [(FunctionDefinitionIndex(11), 6)] },
│     major_status: UNEXPECTED_VERIFIER_ERROR,
│     sub_status: None,
│     location: 0x4::property_map,
│     indices: [(FunctionDefinition, 11)],
│     offsets: [(FunctionDefinitionIndex(11), 6)],
│     exec_state: None,
│ }
└──────────────────

The error is raised from this function:

    public fun read_address<T: key>(object: &Object<T>, key: &String): address acquires PropertyMap {
        let value = read_typed<T, address>(object, key);
        from_bcs::to_address(value)
    }

From the following generated bytecode:

public read_address<Ty0: key>(Arg0: &Object<Ty0>, Arg1: &String): address /* def_idx: 11 */ {
L0:	loc2: vector<u8>
L1:	loc3: String
L2:	loc4: String
L3:	loc5: String
L4:	loc6: String
L5:	loc7: vector<u8>
L6:	loc8: vector<u8>
L7:	loc9: vector<u8>
B0:
	0: MoveLoc[0](Arg0: &Object<Ty0>)
	1: StLoc[2](loc0: &Object<Ty0>)
	2: MoveLoc[1](Arg1: &String)
	3: StLoc[3](loc1: &String)
	4: MoveLoc[2](loc0: &Object<Ty0>)
	5: MoveLoc[3](loc1: &String)
	6: Call read<Ty0>(&Object<Ty0>, &String): String * vector<u8>
        ....

We can see that at instr 6, Call is used instead of CallGeneric, which is suspicious.