linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 11/15] rust: init: add `Zeroable` trait and `init::zeroed` function

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <dc983245-2de9-2aa4-16c3-ae11a8c20b6f@ryhl.io>
Date:   Mon, 3 Apr 2023 19:56:29 +0200
From:   Alice Ryhl <alice@...l.io>
To:     Benno Lossin <y86-dev@...tonmail.com>
Cc:     rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        patches@...ts.linux.dev, Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
        Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>,
        Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
        Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
        Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
        Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 11/15] rust: init: add `Zeroable` trait and
 `init::zeroed` function

On 4/3/23 18:05, Benno Lossin wrote:
> Add the `Zeroable` trait which marks types that can be initialized by
> writing `0x00` to every byte of the type. Also add the `init::zeroed`
> function that creates an initializer for a `Zeroable` type that writes
> `0x00` to every byte.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Benno Lossin <y86-dev@...tonmail.com>
> Cc: Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>
> Cc: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>
> Cc: Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>

Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>

I have two minor suggestions - take them or leave them.

> +pub fn zeroed<T: Zeroable + Unpin>() -> impl Init<T> {
> +    // SAFETY: Because `T: Zeroable`, all bytes zero is a valid bit pattern for `T`
> +    // and because we write all zeroes, the memory is initialized.
> +    unsafe {
> +        init_from_closure(|slot: *mut T| {
> +            slot.write_bytes(0, 1);
> +            Ok(())
> +        })
> +    }
> +}

You don't need `T: Unpin` here.

> +macro_rules! impl_zeroable {
> +    ($($({$($generics:tt)*})? $t:ty, )*) => {
> +        $(unsafe impl$($($generics)*)? Zeroable for $t {})*
> +    };
> +}
> +
> +impl_zeroable! {
> +    // SAFETY: All primitives that are allowed to be zero.
> +    bool,
> +    char,
> +    u8, u16, u32, u64, u128, usize,
> +    i8, i16, i32, i64, i128, isize,
> +    f32, f64,
> +
> +    // SAFETY: These are ZSTs, there is nothing to zero.
> +    {<T: ?Sized>} PhantomData<T>, core::marker::PhantomPinned, Infallible, (),
> +
> +    // SAFETY: Type is allowed to take any value, including all zeros.
> +    {<T>} MaybeUninit<T>,
> +
> +    // SAFETY: All zeros is equivalent to `None` (option layout optimization guarantee).
> +    Option<NonZeroU8>, Option<NonZeroU16>, Option<NonZeroU32>, Option<NonZeroU64>,
> +    Option<NonZeroU128>, Option<NonZeroUsize>,
> +    Option<NonZeroI8>, Option<NonZeroI16>, Option<NonZeroI32>, Option<NonZeroI64>,
> +    Option<NonZeroI128>, Option<NonZeroIsize>,
> +
> +    // SAFETY: All zeros is equivalent to `None` (option layout optimization guarantee).
> +    //
> +    // In this case we are allowed to use `T: ?Sized`, since all zeros is the `None` variant.
> +    {<T: ?Sized>} Option<NonNull<T>>,
> +    {<T: ?Sized>} Option<Box<T>>,
> +
> +    // SAFETY: `null` pointer is valid.
> +    //
> +    // We cannot use `T: ?Sized`, since the VTABLE pointer part of fat pointers is not allowed to be
> +    // null.
> +    {<T>} *mut T, {<T>} *const T,
> +
> +    // SAFETY: `null` pointer is valid and the metadata part of these fat pointers is allowed to be
> +    // zero.
> +    {<T>} *mut [T], {<T>} *const [T], *mut str, *const str,
> +
> +    // SAFETY: `T` is `Zeroable`.
> +    {<const N: usize, T: Zeroable>} [T; N], {<T: Zeroable>} Wrapping<T>,
> +}

Arguably, it would make sense to just expand this macro. The code 
doesn't become that much longer, and it removes the need to understand 
the macro.