Remove unnecessary stat64 pointer casts
In effect, these just casted `&mut stat64` to `*mut stat64`, twice.
That's harmless, but it masked a problem when this was copied to new
code calling `fstatat`, which takes a pointer to `struct stat`. That
will be fixed by #51785, but let's remove the unnecessary casts here
too.
Fix possibly endless loop in ReadDir iterator
Certain directories in `/proc` can cause the `ReadDir` iterator to loop indefinitely. We get an error code (22) when calling libc's `readdir_r` on these directories, but `entry_ptr` is `NULL` at the same time, signalling the end of the directory stream.
This change introduces an internal state to the iterator such that the `Some(Err(..))` value will only be returned once when calling `next`. Subsequent calls will return `None`.
fixes#50619
In effect, these just casted `&mut stat64` to `*mut stat64`, twice.
That's harmless, but it masked a problem when this was copied to new
code calling `fstatat`, which takes a pointer to `struct stat`. That
will be fixed by #51785, but let's remove the unnecessary casts here
too.
libstd: add an RAII utility for sys_common::mutex::Mutex
It is indeed debatable whether or not we should introduce more sophistication like this to the lowest layer of a system library. In fact, `Drop::drop()` cannot be `unsafe` (IIRC there was a discussion on introducing an unsafe variant of `Drop` whose entire scope must be within `unsafe`)
Removed two unused variables in os.rs
Issue #51419 suggested removing two unused variables in `libstd/sys/redox/os.rs`. This PR implements that change.
It compiles for me locally, but I haven't run any other tests.
Certain directories in `/proc` can cause the `ReadDir`
iterator to loop indefinitely. We get an error code (22) when
calling libc's `readdir_r` on these directories, but `entry_ptr`
is `NULL` at the same time, signalling the end of the directory
stream.
This change introduces an internal state to the iterator such
that the `Some(Err(..))` value will only be returned once when
calling `next`. Subsequent calls will return `None`.
fixes#50619
Fix confusing error message for sub_instant
When subtracting an Instant from another, the function will panick when `RHS > self`, but the error message confusingly displays a different error:
```rust
let i = Instant::now();
let other = Instant::now();
if other > i {
println!("{:?}", i - other);
}
```
This results in a panic:
```
thread 'test_instant' panicked at 'other was less than the current instant', libstd/sys/unix/time.rs:292:17
```
But clearly, `other` was actually greater than the current instant.
fs: copy: Use File::set_permissions instead of fs::set_permissions
We already got the open file descriptor at this point.
Don't make the kernel resolve the path again.
When subtracting an Instant from another, the function will panick when `RHS > self`, but the error message confusingly displays a different error:
```rust
let i = Instant::now();
let other = Instant::now();
if other > i {
println!("{:?}", i - other);
}
```
This results in a panic:
```
thread 'test_instant' panicked at 'other was less than the current instant', libstd/sys/unix/time.rs:292:17
```
fs: copy: use copy_file_range on Linux
Linux 4.5 introduced a new system call [copy_file_range](http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/copy_file_range.2.html) to copy data from one file to another.
This PR uses the new system call (if available). This has several advantages:
1. No need to constantly copy data from userspace to kernel space, if the buffer is small or the file is large
2. On some filesystems, like BTRFS, the kernel can leverage internal fs mechanisms for huge performance gains
3. Filesystems on the network dont need to copy data between the host and the client machine (they have to in the current read/write implementation)
I have created a small library that also implements the new system call for some huge performance gains here: https://github.com/nicokoch/fastcopy
Benchmark results are in the README
read2: Use inner function instead of closure
Very minor thing, but there doesn't appear to be a reason to use a closure here.
Generated code is identical in my tests, but I believe it's clearer that nothing from the environment is being used.
Don't unconditionally set CLOEXEC twice on every fd we open on Linux
Previously, every `open64` was accompanied by a `ioctl(…, FIOCLEX)`,
because some old Linux version would ignore the `O_CLOEXEC` flag we pass
to the `open64` function.
Now, we check whether the `CLOEXEC` flag is set on the first file we
open – if it is, we won't do extra syscalls for every opened file. If it
is not set, we fall back to the old behavior of unconditionally calling
`ioctl(…, FIOCLEX)` on newly opened files.
On old Linuxes, this amounts to one extra syscall per process, namely
the `fcntl(…, F_GETFD)` call to check the `CLOEXEC` flag.
On new Linuxes, this reduces the number of syscalls per opened file by
one, except for the first file, where it does the same number of
syscalls as before (`fcntl(…, F_GETFD)` to check the flag instead of
`ioctl(…, FIOCLEX)` to set it).
Previously, every `open64` was accompanied by a `ioctl(…, FIOCLEX)`,
because some old Linux version would ignore the `O_CLOEXEC` flag we pass
to the `open64` function.
Now, we check whether the `CLOEXEC` flag is set on the first file we
open – if it is, we won't do extra syscalls for every opened file. If it
is not set, we fall back to the old behavior of unconditionally calling
`ioctl(…, FIOCLEX)` on newly opened files.
On old Linuxes, this amounts to one extra syscall per process, namely
the `fcntl(…, F_GETFD)` call to check the `CLOEXEC` flag.
On new Linuxes, this reduces the number of syscalls per opened file by
one, except for the first file, where it does the same number of
syscalls as before (`fcntl(…, F_GETFD)` to check the flag instead of
`ioctl(…, FIOCLEX)` to set it).
