linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5] rust: locks: Add `get

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: <ZeJcTl0WuegYHe2h@boqun-archlinux>
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2024 14:53:02 -0800
From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
To: mathys35.gasnier@...il.com
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
	Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>,
	Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
	Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
	Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
	Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>,
	Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Martin Rodriguez Reboredo <yakoyoku@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] rust: locks: Add `get_mut` method to `Lock`

On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 06:33:23PM +0100, Mathys-Gasnier via B4 Relay wrote:
> From: Mathys-Gasnier <mathys35.gasnier@...il.com>
> 
> Having a mutable reference guarantees that no other threads have
> access to the lock, so we can take advantage of that to grant callers
> access to the protected data without the cost of acquiring and
> releasing the locks. Since the lifetime of the data is tied to the
> mutable reference, the borrow checker guarantees that the usage is safe.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Martin Rodriguez Reboredo <yakoyoku@...il.com>
> Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>
> Reviewed-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Mathys-Gasnier <mathys35.gasnier@...il.com>
> ---
> Changes in v5:
> - Adding example
> - Link to v4: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240226-rust-locks-get-mut-v4-1-24abf57707a8@gmail.com
> 
> Changes in v4:
> - Improved documentation
> - Link to v3: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240222-rust-locks-get-mut-v3-1-d38a6f4bde3d@gmail.com
> 
> Changes in v3:
> - Changing the function to take a `Pin<&mut self>` instead of a `&mut self`
> - Removed reviewed-by's since big changes were made. Please take another
>   look.
> - Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240212-rust-locks-get-mut-v2-1-5ccd34c2b70b@gmail.com
> 
> Changes in v2:
> - Improved doc comment. 
> - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240209-rust-locks-get-mut-v1-1-ce351fc3de47@gmail.com
> ---
>  rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs b/rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs
> index f12a684bc957..345ca7be9d9f 100644
> --- a/rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs
> +++ b/rust/kernel/sync/lock.rs
> @@ -7,7 +7,11 @@
>  
>  use super::LockClassKey;
>  use crate::{bindings, init::PinInit, pin_init, str::CStr, types::Opaque, types::ScopeGuard};
> -use core::{cell::UnsafeCell, marker::PhantomData, marker::PhantomPinned};
> +use core::{
> +    cell::UnsafeCell,
> +    marker::{PhantomData, PhantomPinned},
> +    pin::Pin,
> +};
>  use macros::pin_data;
>  
>  pub mod mutex;
> @@ -121,6 +125,38 @@ pub fn lock(&self) -> Guard<'_, T, B> {
>          // SAFETY: The lock was just acquired.
>          unsafe { Guard::new(self, state) }
>      }
> +
> +    /// Gets the data contained in the lock.
> +    ///
> +    /// Having a mutable reference to the lock guarantees that no other threads have access to the
> +    /// lock. And because `data` is not structurally pinned, it is safe to get a mutable reference
> +    /// to the lock content.
> +    ///
> +    /// # Example
> +    ///

Thanks! But please see below:

> +    /// Using `get_mut` with a mutex.
> +    ///
> +    /// ```

The example looks good, however, I was thinking about something like:

    /// ```
    /// use kernel::sync::{new_mutex, Mutex};
    ///
    /// let mut m = Box::pin_init(new_mutex!(None))?;
    ///
    /// assert_eq!(*(m.lock()), None);
    ///
    /// Mutex::get_mut(m.as_mut()).replace(42i32);
    ///
    /// assert_eq!(*(m.lock()), Some(42));
    ///
    /// # Ok::<(), Error>(())
    /// ```

because, this will also run something instead of just compiling a
function.

> +    /// use kernel::sync::Mutex;
> +    ///
> +    /// struct Example {
> +    ///     a: u32,
> +    ///     b: u32,
> +    /// }
> +    ///
> +    /// fn example(m: Pin<&mut Mutex<Example>>) {
> +    ///     // Calling from Mutex to avoid conflict with Pin::get_mut().
> +    ///     let mut data = Mutex::get_mut(m);

The other thing I notice when I try to make the above example work is:
`Pin` also has a `get_mut`[1] function, so seems we have to use
`Mutex::get_mut` to invoke the correct function, I personally want the
following just works:

	m.as_mut().get_mut().replace(42i32);

and looks to me the simplest way is to change the function's name (for
example `get_data_mut`), and we can do:

	m.as_mut().get_data_mut().replace(42i32);

Thoughts?

Regards,
Boqun


[1]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/core/pin/struct.Pin.html#method.get_mut



> +    ///     data.a += 10;
> +    ///     data.b += 20;
> +    /// }
> +    /// ```
> +    pub fn get_mut(self: Pin<&mut Self>) -> &mut T {
> +        // SAFETY: The lock will only be used to get a reference to the data, therefore self won't
> +        // get moved.
> +        let lock = unsafe { self.get_unchecked_mut() };
> +        lock.data.get_mut()
> +    }
>  }
>  
>  /// A lock guard.
> 
> ---
> base-commit: 711cbfc717650532624ca9f56fbaf191bed56e67
> change-id: 20240118-rust-locks-get-mut-c42072101d7a
> 
> Best regards,
> -- 
> Mathys-Gasnier <mathys35.gasnier@...il.com>
> 
>