use strict provenance APIs
The stdlib was adjusted to avoid bare int2ptr casts, but recently some casts of that sort have sneaked back in. Let's fix that. :)
implement ptr.addr() via transmute
As per the discussion in https://github.com/rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/286, the semantics for ptr-to-int transmutes that we are going with for now is to make them strip provenance without exposing it. That's exactly what `ptr.addr()` does! So we can implement `ptr.addr()` via `transmute`. This also means that once https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/97684 lands, Miri can distinguish `ptr.addr()` from `ptr.expose_addr()`, and the following code will correctly be called out as having UB (if permissive provenance mode is enabled, which will become the default once the [implementation is complete](https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/2133)):
```rust
fn main() {
let x: i32 = 3;
let x_ptr = &x as *const i32;
let x_usize: usize = x_ptr.addr();
// Cast back an address that did *not* get exposed.
let ptr = std::ptr::from_exposed_addr::<i32>(x_usize);
assert_eq!(unsafe { *ptr }, 3); //~ ERROR Undefined Behavior: dereferencing pointer failed
}
```
This completes the Miri implementation of the new distinctions introduced by strict provenance. :)
Cc `@Gankra` -- for now I left in your `FIXME(strict_provenance_magic)` saying these should be intrinsics, but I do not necessarily agree that they should be. Or if we have an intrinsic, I think it should behave exactly like the `transmute` does, which makes one wonder why the intrinsic should be needed.
Additional `*mut [T]` methods
Split out from #94247
This adds the following methods to raw slices that already exist on regular slices
* `*mut [T]::is_empty`
* `*mut [T]::split_at_mut`
* `*mut [T]::split_at_mut_unchecked`
These methods reduce the amount of unsafe code needed to migrate `ChunksMut` and related iterators
to raw slices (#94247)
r? `@m-ou-se`
ptr::invalid is not equivalent to a int2ptr cast
I just realized I forgot to update these docs when adding `from_exposed_addr`.
Right now the docs say `invalid` and `from_exposed_addr` are both equivalent to a cast, and that is clearly not what we want.
Cc ``@Gankra``
Partially stabilize `(const_)slice_ptr_len` feature by stabilizing `NonNull::len`
This PR partially stabilizes features `const_slice_ptr_len` and `slice_ptr_len` by only stabilizing `NonNull::len`. This partial stabilization is tracked under features `slice_ptr_len_nonnull` and `const_slice_ptr_len_nonnull`, for which this PR can serve as the tracking issue.
To summarize the discussion from #71146 leading up to this partial stabilization request:
It's currently a bit footgunny to obtain the length of a raw slice pointer, stabilization of `NonNull:len` will help with removing these footguns. Some example footguns are:
```rust
/// # Safety
/// The caller must ensure that `ptr`:
/// 1. does not point to memory that was previously allocated but is now deallocated;
/// 2. is within the bounds of a single allocated object;
/// 3. does not to point to a slice for which the length exceeds `isize::MAX` bytes;
/// 4. points to a properly aligned address;
/// 5. does not point to uninitialized memory;
/// 6. does not point to a mutably borrowed memory location.
pub unsafe fn ptr_len<T>(ptr: core::ptr::NonNull<[T]>) -> usize {
(&*ptr.as_ptr()).len()
}
```
A slightly less complicated version (but still more complicated than it needs to be):
```rust
/// # Safety
/// The caller must ensure that the start of `ptr`:
/// 1. does not point to memory that was previously allocated but is now deallocated;
/// 2. must be within the bounds of a single allocated object.
pub unsafe fn ptr_len<T>(ptr: NonNull<[T]>) -> usize {
(&*(ptr.as_ptr() as *const [()])).len()
}
```
This PR does not stabilize `<*const [T]>::len` and `<*mut [T]>::len` because the tracking issue #71146 list a potential blocker for these methods, but this blocker [does not apply](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/71146#issuecomment-808735714) to `NonNull::len`.
We should probably also ping the [Constant Evaluation WG](https://github.com/rust-lang/const-eval) since this PR includes a `#[rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable(const_slice_ptr_len)]`. My instinct here is that this will probably be okay because the pointer is not actually dereferenced and `len()` does not touch the address component of the pointer, but would be best to double check :)
One potential down-side was raised that stabilizing `NonNull::len` could lead to encouragement of coding patterns like:
```
pub fn ptr_len<T>(ptr: *mut [T]) -> usize {
NonNull::new(ptr).unwrap().len()
}
```
which unnecessarily assert non-nullness. However, these are much less of a footgun than the above examples and this should be resolved when `slice_ptr_len` fully stabilizes eventually.
Extend ptr::null and null_mut to all thin (including extern) types
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/93959
This change was accepted in https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2580-ptr-meta.html
Note that this changes the signature of **stable** functions. The change should be backward-compatible, but it is **insta-stable** since it cannot (easily, at all?) be made available only through a `#![feature(…)]` opt-in.
The RFC also proposed the same change for `NonNull::dangling`, which makes sense it terms of its signature but not in terms of its implementation. `dangling` uses `align_of()` as an address. But what `align_of()` should be for extern types or whether it should be allowed at all remains an open question.
This commit depends on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93977, which is not yet part of the bootstrap compiler. So `#[cfg]` is used to only apply the change in stage 1+. As far a I know bounds cannot be made conditional with `#[cfg]`, so the entire functions are duplicated. This is unfortunate but temporary.
Since this duplication makes it less obvious in the diff, the new definitions differ in:
* More permissive bounds (`Thin` instead of implied `Sized`)
* Different implementation
* Having `rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable(const_fn_trait_bound)`
* Having `rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable(ptr_metadata)`
Change `NonNull::as_uninit_*` to take self by value (as opposed to reference), matching primitive pointers.
Copied from my comment on [#75402](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/75402#issuecomment-1100496823):
> I noticed that `as_uninit_*` on pointers take `self` by value (and pointers are `Copy`), e.g. see [`as_uninit_mut`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/core/primitive.pointer.html#method.as_uninit_mut).
>
> However, on `NonNull`, these functions take `self` by reference, e.g. see the function with the same name by for `NonNull`: [`as_uninit_mut`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/ptr/struct.NonNull.html#method.as_uninit_mut) takes `self` by mutable reference. Even more inconsistent, [`as_uninit_slice_mut`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/ptr/struct.NonNull.html#method.as_uninit_slice_mut) returns a mutable reference, but takes `self` by immutable reference.
>
> I think these methods should take `self` by value for consistency. The returned lifetime is unbounded anyways and not tied to the pointer/NonNull value anyways
I realized the change is trivial (if desired) so here I am creating my first PR. I think it's not a breaking change since (it's on nightly and) `NonNull` is `Copy`; all previous usages of these methods taking `self` by reference should continue to compile. However, it might cause warnings to appear on usages of `NonNull::as_uninit_mut`, which used to require the the `NonNull` variable be declared `mut`, but now it's not necessary.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/93959
This change was accepted in https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2580-ptr-meta.html
Note that this changes the signature of **stable** functions.
The change should be backward-compatible, but it is **insta-stable**
since it cannot (easily, at all?) be made available only
through a `#![feature(…)]` opt-in.
The RFC also proposed the same change for `NonNull::dangling`,
which makes sense it terms of its signature but not in terms of its implementation.
`dangling` uses `align_of()` as an address. But what `align_of()` should be for
extern types or whether it should be allowed at all remains an open question.
This commit depends on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93977, which is not yet
part of the bootstrap compiler. So `#[cfg]` is used to only apply the change in
stage 1+. As far a I know bounds cannot be made conditional with `#[cfg]`, so the
entire functions are duplicated. This is unfortunate but temporary.
Since this duplication makes it less obvious in the diff,
the new definitions differ in:
* More permissive bounds (`Thin` instead of implied `Sized`)
* Different implementation
* Having `rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable(ptr_metadata)`
Apparently LLVM is unable to understand that if count_ones() == 1 then self != 0.
Adding `assume(align != 0)` helps generating better asm:
https://rust.godbolt.org/z/ja18YKq91
Since they work on byte pointers (by `.cast::<u8>()`ing them), there is
no need to know the size of `T` and so there is no need for `T: Sized`.
The `is_aligned_to` is similar, though it doesn't need the _alignment_
of `T`.
Like we have `add`/`sub` which are the `usize` version of `offset`, this adds the `usize` equivalent of `offset_from`. Like how `.add(d)` replaced a whole bunch of `.offset(d as isize)`, you can see from the changes here that it's fairly common that code actually knows the order between the pointers and *wants* a `usize`, not an `isize`.
As a bonus, this can do `sub nuw`+`udiv exact`, rather than `sub`+`sdiv exact`, which can be optimized slightly better because it doesn't have to worry about negatives. That's why the slice iterators weren't using `offset_from`, though I haven't updated that code in this PR because slices are so perf-critical that I'll do it as its own change.
This is an intrinsic, like `offset_from`, so that it can eventually be allowed in CTFE. It also allows checking the extra safety condition -- see the test confirming that CTFE catches it if you pass the pointers in the wrong order.
Link to correct `as_mut` in docs for `pointer::as_ref`
It previously linked to the unstable const-mut-cast method instead of
the `mut` counterpart for `as_ref`.
Closes#96327
reference to taking `self` by value. This is consistent with the methods
of the same names on primitive pointers. The returned lifetime was
already previously unbounded.
explicitly distinguish pointer::addr and pointer::expose_addr
``@bgeron`` pointed out that the current docs promise that `ptr.addr()` and `ptr as usize` are equivalent. I don't think that is a promise we want to make. (Conceptually, `ptr as usize` might 'escape' the provenance to enable future `usize as ptr` casts, but `ptr.addr()` dertainly does not do that.)
So I propose we word the docs a bit more carefully here. ``@Gankra`` what do you think?
Fix &mut invalidation in ptr::swap doctest
Under Stacked Borrows with raw pointer tagging, the previous code was UB
because the code which creates the the second pointer borrows the array
through a tag in the borrow stacks below the Unique tag that our first
pointer is based on, thus invalidating the first pointer.
This is not definitely a bug and may never be real UB, but I desperately
want people to write code that conforms to SB with raw pointer tagging
so that I can write good diagnostics. The alternative aliasing models
aren't possible to diagnose well due to state space explosion.
Therefore, it would be super cool if the standard library nudged people
towards writing code that is valid with respect to SB with raw pointer
tagging.
The diagnostics that I want to write are implemented in a branch of Miri and the one for this case is below:
```
error: Undefined Behavior: attempting a read access using <2170> at alloc1068[0x0], but that tag does not exist in the borrow stack for this location
--> /home/ben/rust/library/core/src/intrinsics.rs:2103:14
|
2103 | unsafe { copy_nonoverlapping(src, dst, count) }
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
| |
| attempting a read access using <2170> at alloc1068[0x0], but that tag does not exist in the borrow stack for this location
| this error occurs as part of an access at alloc1068[0x0..0x8]
|
= help: this indicates a potential bug in the program: it performed an invalid operation, but the rules it violated are still experimental
= help: see https://github.com/rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines/blob/master/wip/stacked-borrows.md for further information
help: <2170> was created due to a retag at offsets [0x0..0x10]
--> ../libcore/src/ptr/mod.rs:640:9
|
8 | let x = array[0..].as_mut_ptr() as *mut [u32; 2]; // this is `array[0..2]`
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
help: <2170> was later invalidated due to a retag at offsets [0x0..0x10]
--> ../libcore/src/ptr/mod.rs:641:9
|
9 | let y = array[2..].as_mut_ptr() as *mut [u32; 2]; // this is `array[2..4]`
| ^^^^^
= note: inside `std::intrinsics::copy_nonoverlapping::<[u32; 2]>` at /home/ben/rust/library/core/src/intrinsics.rs:2103:14
= note: inside `std::ptr::swap::<[u32; 2]>` at /home/ben/rust/library/core/src/ptr/mod.rs:685:9
note: inside `main::_doctest_main____libcore_src_ptr_mod_rs_635_0` at ../libcore/src/ptr/mod.rs:12:5
--> ../libcore/src/ptr/mod.rs:644:5
|
12 | ptr::swap(x, y);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
note: inside `main` at ../libcore/src/ptr/mod.rs:15:3
--> ../libcore/src/ptr/mod.rs:647:3
|
15 | } _doctest_main____libcore_src_ptr_mod_rs_635_0() }
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
note: some details are omitted, run with `MIRIFLAGS=-Zmiri-backtrace=full` for a verbose backtrace
error: aborting due to previous error
```
Under Stacked Borrows with raw pointer tagging, the previous code was UB
because the code which creates the the second pointer borrows the array
through a tag in the borrow stacks below the Unique tag that our first
pointer is based on, thus invalidating the first pointer.
This is not definitely a bug and may never be real UB, but I desperately
want people to write code that conforms to SB with raw pointer tagging
so that I can write good diagnostics. The alternative aliasing models
aren't possible to diagnose well due to state space explosion.
Therefore, it would be super cool if the standard library nudged people
towards writing code that is valid with respect to SB with raw pointer
tagging.
Add debug assertions to some unsafe functions
As suggested by https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/51713
~~Some similar code calls `abort()` instead of `panic!()` but aborting doesn't work in a `const fn`, and the intrinsic for doing dispatch based on whether execution is in a const is unstable.~~
This picked up some invalid uses of `get_unchecked` in the compiler, and fixes them.
I can confirm that they do in fact pick up invalid uses of `get_unchecked` in the wild, though the user experience is less-than-awesome:
```
Running unittests (target/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/debug/deps/rle_decode_fast-04b7918da2001b50)
running 6 tests
error: test failed, to rerun pass '--lib'
Caused by:
process didn't exit successfully: `/home/ben/rle-decode-helper/target/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/debug/deps/rle_decode_fast-04b7918da2001b50` (signal: 4, SIGILL: illegal instruction)
```
~~As best I can tell these changes produce a 6% regression in the runtime of `./x.py test` when `[rust] debug = true` is set.~~
Latest commit (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/92686/commits/6894d559bdb4365243b3f4bf73f18e4b1bed04d1) brings the additional overhead from this PR down to 0.5%, while also adding a few more assertions. I think this actually covers all the places in `core` that it is reasonable to check for safety requirements at runtime.
Thoughts?
`&mut [T]` implies validity which automatically makes `ptr::add` ok within its bounds.
But `*mut [T]` does not. Since we still want the benefits of in-bounds pointer arithmetic
`split_at_must` must require the caller to pass valid pointers and therefore it is `unsafe`.
Split out from #94247
This adds the following methods to raw slices that already exist on regular slices
* `*mut [T]::is_empty`
* `*mut [T]::split_at_mut`
* `*mut [T]::split_at_unchecked`
These methods reduce the amount of unsafe code needed to migrate ChunksMut and related iterators
to raw slices (#94247)
Co-authored-by:: The 8472 <git@infinite-source.de>
Implement provenance preserving methods on NonNull
### Description
Add the `addr`, `with_addr`, `map_addr` methods to the `NonNull` type, and map the address type to `NonZeroUsize`.
### Motivation
The `NonNull` type is useful for implementing pointer types which have the 0-niche. It is currently possible to implement these provenance preserving functions by calling `NonNull::as_ptr` and `new_unchecked`. The adding these methods makes it more ergonomic.
### Testing
Added a unit test of a non-null tagged pointer type. This is based on some real code I have elsewhere, that currently routes the pointer through a `NonZeroUsize` and back out to produce a usable pointer. I wanted to produce an ideal version of the same tagged pointer struct that preserved pointer provenance.
### Related
Extension of APIs proposed in #95228 . I can also split this out into a separate tracking issue if that is better (though I may need some pointers on how to do that).
Handle rustc_const_stable attribute in library feature collector
The library feature collector in [compiler/rustc_passes/src/lib_features.rs](551b4fa395/compiler/rustc_passes/src/lib_features.rs) has only been looking at `#[stable(…)]`, `#[unstable(…)]`, and `#[rustc_const_unstable(…)]` attributes, while ignoring `#[rustc_const_stable(…)]`. The consequences of this were:
- When any const feature got stabilized (changing one or more `rustc_const_unstable` to `rustc_const_stable`), users who had previously enabled that unstable feature using `#![feature(…)]` would get told "unknown feature", rather than rustc's nicer "the feature … has been stable since … and no longer requires an attribute to enable".
This can be seen in the way that https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93957#issuecomment-1079794660 failed after rebase:
```console
error[E0635]: unknown feature `const_ptr_offset`
--> $DIR/offset_from_ub.rs:1:35
|
LL | #![feature(const_ptr_offset_from, const_ptr_offset)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```
- We weren't enforcing that a particular feature is either stable everywhere or unstable everywhere, and that a feature that has been stabilized has the same stabilization version everywhere, both of which we enforce for the other stability attributes.
This PR updates the library feature collector to handle `rustc_const_stable`, and fixes places in the standard library and test suite where `rustc_const_stable` was being used in a way that does not meet the rules for a stability attribute.
**Description**
Add the `addr`, `with_addr, `map_addr` methods to the `NonNull` type,
and map the address type to `NonZeroUsize`.
**Motiviation**
The `NonNull` type is useful for implementing pointer types which have
the 0-niche. It is currently possible to implement these provenance
preserving functions by calling `NonNull::as_ptr` and `new_unchecked`.
The addition of these methods simply make it more ergonomic to use.
**Testing**
Added a unit test of a nonnull tagged pointer type. This is based on
some real code I have elsewhere, that currently routes the pointer
through a `NonZeroUsize` and back out to produce a usable pointer.
