Mark `Arc::from_inner` / `Rc::from_inner` as unsafe
While it's an internal function, it is easy to create invalid Arc/Rcs to
a dangling pointer with it.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/89740
Add #[must_use] to alloc functions that would leak memory
As [requested](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/89899#issuecomment-955600779) by `@joshtriplett.`
> Please do go ahead and add the ones whose only legitimate use for ignoring the return value is leaking memory. (In a separate PR please.) I think it's sufficiently error-prone to call something like alloc and ignore the result that it's legitimate to require `let _ =` for that.
I added `realloc` myself. Clippy ignored it because of its `mut` argument.
```rust
alloc/src/alloc.rs:123:1 alloc unsafe fn realloc(ptr: *mut u8, layout: Layout, new_size: usize) -> *mut u8;
```
Parent issue: #89692
r? `@joshtriplett`
Add #[must_use] to non-mutating verb methods
These are methods that could be misconstrued to mutate their input, similar to #89694. I gave each one a different custom message.
I wrote that `upgrade` and `downgrade` don't modify the input pointers. Logically they don't, but technically they do...
Parent issue: #89692
r? ```@joshtriplett```
Add #[must_use] to alloc constructors
Added `#[must_use]`. to the various forms of `new`, `pin`, and `with_capacity` in the `alloc` crate. No extra explanations given as I couldn't think of anything useful to add.
I figure this deserves extra scrutiny compared to the other PRs I've done so far. In particular:
* The 4 `pin`/`pin_in` methods I touched. Are there legitimate use cases for pinning and not using the result? Pinning's a difficult concept I'm not very comfortable with.
* `Box`'s constructors. Do people ever create boxes just for the side effects... allocating or zeroing out memory?
Parent issue: #89692
r? ``@joshtriplett``
----------
Fix spacing for links inside code blocks, and improve link tooltips in alloc::fmt
----------
Fix spacing for links inside code blocks, and improve link tooltips in alloc::{rc, sync}
----------
Fix spacing for links inside code blocks, and improve link tooltips in alloc::string
----------
Fix spacing for links inside code blocks in alloc::vec
----------
Fix spacing for links inside code blocks in core::option
----------
Fix spacing for links inside code blocks, and improve a few link tooltips in core::result
----------
Fix spacing for links inside code blocks in core::{iter::{self, iterator}, stream::stream, poll}
----------
Fix spacing for links inside code blocks, and improve a few link tooltips in std::{fs, path}
----------
Fix spacing for links inside code blocks in std::{collections, time}
----------
Fix spacing for links inside code blocks in and make formatting of `&str`-like types consistent in std::ffi::{c_str, os_str}
----------
Fix spacing for links inside code blocks, and improve link tooltips in std::ffi
----------
Fix spacing for links inside code blocks, and improve a few link tooltips
in std::{io::{self, buffered::{bufreader, bufwriter}, cursor, util}, net::{self, addr}}
----------
Fix typo in link to `into` for `OsString` docs
----------
Remove tooltips that will probably become redundant in the future
----------
Apply suggestions from code review
Replacing `…std/primitive.reference.html` paths with just `reference`
Co-authored-by: Joshua Nelson <github@jyn.dev>
----------
Also replace `…std/primitive.reference.html` paths with just `reference` in `core::pin`
Related discussion in the users forum:
https://users.rust-lang.org/t/what-s-this-alleged-difference-between-arc-make-mut-and-rc-make-mut/63747?u=steffahn
Also includes small formatting improvement in the documentation of `Rc::make_mut`.
This commit makes the two documentations in question complete analogs. The previously claimed point in which
one "differs from the behavior of" the other turns out to be incorrect, AFAIK.
One remaining inaccuracy: `Weak` pointers aren't disassociated from the allocation but only from the contained
value, i.e. in case of outstanding `Weak` pointers there still is a new allocation created, just the
call to `.clone()` is avoided, instead the value is moved from one allocation to the other.
They are infallible, and could not be actually used because
they will trigger an error when monomorphized, but it is better
to just remove them.
Link: https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/pull/402
Suggested-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
For certain sorts of systems, programming, it's deemed essential that
all allocation failures be explicitly handled where they occur. For
example, see Linus Torvald's opinion in [1]. Merely not calling global
panic handlers, or always `try_reserving` first (for vectors), is not
deemed good enough, because the mere presence of the global OOM handlers
is burdens static analysis.
One option for these projects to use rust would just be to skip `alloc`,
rolling their own allocation abstractions. But this would, in my
opinion be a real shame. `alloc` has a few `try_*` methods already, and
we could easily have more. Features like custom allocator support also
demonstrate and existing to support diverse use-cases with the same
abstractions.
A natural way to add such a feature flag would a Cargo feature, but
there are currently uncertainties around how std library crate's Cargo
features may or not be stable, so to avoid any risk of stabilizing by
mistake we are going with a more low-level "raw cfg" token, which
cannot be interacted with via Cargo alone.
Note also that since there is no notion of "default cfg tokens" outside
of Cargo features, we have to invert the condition from
`global_oom_handling` to to `not(no_global_oom_handling)`. This breaks
the monotonicity that would be important for a Cargo feature (i.e.
turning on more features should never break compatibility), but it
doesn't matter for raw cfg tokens which are not intended to be
"constraint solved" by Cargo or anything else.
To support this use-case we create a new feature, "global-oom-handling",
on by default, and put the global OOM handler infra and everything else
it that depends on it behind it. By default, nothing is changed, but
users concerned about global handling can make sure it is disabled, and
be confident that all OOM handling is local and explicit.
For this first iteration, non-flat collections are outright disabled.
`Vec` and `String` don't yet have `try_*` allocation methods, but are
kept anyways since they can be oom-safely created "from parts", and we
hope to add those `try_` methods in the future.
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHk-=wh_sNLoz84AUUzuqXEsYH35u=8HV3vK-jbRbJ_B-JjGrg@mail.gmail.com/
The advantage of making these docs is mostly in pointing out that these
functions all make new allocations and copy/clone/move the source into them.
These docs are on the function, and not the `impl` block, to avoid showing
the "[+] show undocumented items" button.
CC #51430
Re-stabilize Weak::as_ptr and friends for unsized T
As per [T-lang consensus](https://hackmd.io/7r3_is6uTz-163fsOV8Vfg), this uses a branch to handle the dangling case. The discussed optimization of only doing the branch in the T: ?Sized case is left for a followup patch, as doing so is not trivial (as it requires specialization) and not _obviously_ better (as it requires using `wrapping_offset` rather than `offset` more).
<details><summary>Basically said optimization</summary>
Specialize on `T: Sized`:
```rust
fn as_ptr(&self) -> *const T {
if [ T is Sized ] || !is_dangling(ptr) {
(ptr as *mut T).set_ptr_value( (ptr as *mut u8).wrapping_offset(data_offset) )
} else {
ptr::null()
}
}
fn from_raw(*const T) -> Self {
if [ T is Sized ] || !ptr.is_null() {
let ptr = (ptr as *mut RcBox).set_ptr_value( (ptr as *mut u8).wrapping_offset(-data_offset) );
Weak { ptr }
} else {
Weak::new()
}
}
```
(but with more `set_ptr_value` to avoid `Sized` restrictions and maintain metadata.)
Written in this fashion, this is not a correctness-critical specialization (i.e. so long as `[ T is Sized ]` is false for unsized `T`, it can be `rand()` for sized `T` without breaking correctness), but it's still touchy, so I'd rather do it in another PR with separate review.
---
</details>
This effectively reverts #80422 and re-establishes #74160. T-libs [previously signed off](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/74160#issuecomment-660539373) on this stable API change in #74160.
As we did with `Box`, we can allocate an uninitialized `Rc` or `Arc`
beforehand, giving the optimizer a chance to skip the local value for
regular clones, or avoid any local altogether for `T: Copy`.
As per T-lang consensus, this uses a branch to handle the dangling case.
The discussed optimization of only doing the branch in the T: ?Sized
case is left for a followup patch, as doing so is not trivial
(as it requires specialization for correctness, not just optimization).
