Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Rollup merge of rust-lang#69618 - hniksic:mem-forget-doc-fix, r=RalfJung
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
Clarify the relationship between `forget()` and `ManuallyDrop`.

As discussed on reddit, this commit addresses two issues with the
documentation of `mem::forget()`:

* The documentation of `mem::forget()` can confuse the reader because of the
  discrepancy between usage examples that show correct usage and the
  accompanying text which speaks of the possibility of double-free.  The
  text that says "if the panic occurs before `mem::forget` was called"
  refers to a variant of the second example that was never shown, modified
  to use `mem::forget` instead of `ManuallyDrop`.  Ideally the documentation
  should show both variants, so it's clear what it's talking about.

  Also, the double free could be fixed just by placing `mem::forget(v)`
  before the construction of `s`.  Since the lifetimes of `s` and `v`
  wouldn't overlap, there would be no point where panic could cause a double
  free.  This could be mentioned, and contrasted against the more robust fix
  of using `ManuallyDrop`.

* This sentence seems unjustified: "For some types, operations such as
  passing ownership (to a funcion like `mem::forget`) requires them to
  actually be fully owned right now [...]".  Unlike C++, Rust has no move
  constructors, its moves are (possibly elided) bitwise copies.  Even if you
  pass an invalid object to `mem::forget`, no harm should come to pass
  because `mem::forget` consumes the object and exists solely to prevent
  drop, so there no one left to observe the invalid state state.
  • Loading branch information
Dylan-DPC authored Mar 19, 2020
2 parents a9a8151 + 2bebe8d commit 28e7089
Showing 1 changed file with 49 additions and 16 deletions.
65 changes: 49 additions & 16 deletions src/libcore/mem/mod.rs
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -58,7 +58,9 @@ pub use crate::intrinsics::transmute;
///
/// # Examples
///
/// Leak an I/O object, never closing the file:
/// The canonical safe use of `mem::forget` is to circumvent a value's destructor
/// implemented by the `Drop` trait. For example, this will leak a `File`, i.e. reclaim
/// the space taken by the variable but never close the underlying system resource:
///
/// ```no_run
/// use std::mem;
Expand All @@ -68,9 +70,40 @@ pub use crate::intrinsics::transmute;
/// mem::forget(file);
/// ```
///
/// The practical use cases for `forget` are rather specialized and mainly come
/// up in unsafe or FFI code. However, [`ManuallyDrop`] is usually preferred
/// for such cases, e.g.:
/// This is useful when the ownership of the underlying resource was previously
/// transferred to code outside of Rust, for example by transmitting the raw
/// file descriptor to C code.
///
/// # Relationship with `ManuallyDrop`
///
/// While `mem::forget` can also be used to transfer *memory* ownership, doing so is error-prone.
/// [`ManuallyDrop`] should be used instead. Consider, for example, this code:
///
/// ```
/// use std::mem;
///
/// let mut v = vec![65, 122];
/// // Build a `String` using the contents of `v`
/// let s = unsafe { String::from_raw_parts(v.as_mut_ptr(), v.len(), v.capacity()) };
/// // leak `v` because its memory is now managed by `s`
/// mem::forget(v); // ERROR - v is invalid and must not be passed to a function
/// assert_eq!(s, "Az");
/// // `s` is implicitly dropped and its memory deallocated.
/// ```
///
/// There are two issues with the above example:
///
/// * If more code were added between the construction of `String` and the invocation of
/// `mem::forget()`, a panic within it would cause a double free because the same memory
/// is handled by both `v` and `s`.
/// * After calling `v.as_mut_ptr()` and transmitting the ownership of the data to `s`,
/// the `v` value is invalid. Even when a value is just moved to `mem::forget` (which won't
/// inspect it), some types have strict requirements on their values that
/// make them invalid when dangling or no longer owned. Using invalid values in any
/// way, including passing them to or returning them from functions, constitutes
/// undefined behavior and may break the assumptions made by the compiler.
///
/// Switching to `ManuallyDrop` avoids both issues:
///
/// ```
/// use std::mem::ManuallyDrop;
Expand All @@ -80,24 +113,24 @@ pub use crate::intrinsics::transmute;
/// // does not get dropped!
/// let mut v = ManuallyDrop::new(v);
/// // Now disassemble `v`. These operations cannot panic, so there cannot be a leak.
/// let ptr = v.as_mut_ptr();
/// let cap = v.capacity();
/// let (ptr, len, cap) = (v.as_mut_ptr(), v.len(), v.capacity());
/// // Finally, build a `String`.
/// let s = unsafe { String::from_raw_parts(ptr, 2, cap) };
/// let s = unsafe { String::from_raw_parts(ptr, len, cap) };
/// assert_eq!(s, "Az");
/// // `s` is implicitly dropped and its memory deallocated.
/// ```
///
/// Using `ManuallyDrop` here has two advantages:
/// `ManuallyDrop` robustly prevents double-free because we disable `v`'s destructor
/// before doing anything else. `mem::forget()` doesn't allow this because it consumes its
/// argument, forcing us to call it only after extracting anything we need from `v`. Even
/// if a panic were introduced between construction of `ManuallyDrop` and building the
/// string (which cannot happen in the code as shown), it would result in a leak and not a
/// double free. In other words, `ManuallyDrop` errs on the side of leaking instead of
/// erring on the side of (double-)dropping.
///
/// * We do not "touch" `v` after disassembling it. For some types, operations
/// such as passing ownership (to a function like `mem::forget`) requires them to actually
/// be fully owned right now; that is a promise we do not want to make here as we are
/// in the process of transferring ownership to the new `String` we are building.
/// * In case of an unexpected panic, `ManuallyDrop` is not dropped, but if the panic
/// occurs before `mem::forget` was called we might end up dropping invalid data,
/// or double-dropping. In other words, `ManuallyDrop` errs on the side of leaking
/// instead of erring on the side of dropping.
/// Also, `ManuallyDrop` prevents us from having to "touch" `v` after transferring the
/// ownership to `s` - the final step of interacting with `v` to dispoe of it without
/// running its destructor is entirely avoided.
///
/// [drop]: fn.drop.html
/// [uninit]: fn.uninitialized.html
Expand Down

0 comments on commit 28e7089

Please sign in to comment.