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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z9leoGrF5pQeZ3tH@pollux>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 12:53:04 +0100
From: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>
To: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>
Cc: Tamir Duberstein <tamird@...il.com>,
	Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
	Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
	Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
	Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>,
	Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rust: alloc: use `spare_capacity_mut` to reduce unsafe

On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 09:22:59AM +0000, Alice Ryhl wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 01:55:18PM -0400, Tamir Duberstein wrote:
> > > >
> > > >       fn dec_len(&mut self, count: usize) -> &mut [T] {
> > > >           self.len = self.len.saturating_sub(count);
> > > >
> > > >           // Potentially broken, since maybe `count > self.len`, hence need an
> > > >           // additional check.
> > > >           unsafe { slice::from_raw_parts_mut(self.as_mut_ptr().add(self.len), count) }
> > > >       }
> > >
> > > Ah sorry, in my mental model the function returned `()`. Do we need the
> > > return value?
> > 
> > The return value is the whole genesis of `dec_len`, we want to return
> > something to let the caller know they need to drop or copy the memory.
> 
> Hold on .. it returns &mut [T]. You're usually not allowed to take
> ownership of or drop values behind a mutable reference.

I think it should be fine. dec_len(), by returning this slice, indicates to the
caller what's left behind in case no action is taken.

Subsequent operations are unsafe anyways and can easily justify their validity
by saying that they only take over, what otherwise would have been left behind.

Do I miss anything?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ