-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 105
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Redesign Ptr
invariants to enforce both upper and lower bounds
#1866
Comments
joshlf
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 12, 2024
Previously, we supported the `AtLeast` bound, which was used to describe a subset relationship in which `I: AtLeast<J>` implied that `I` as at least as restrictive as `J`. However, as described in #1866, this incorrectly models invariants as monotonic. In reality, invariants both provide guarantees but also *require* guarantees. This commit takes a step in the direction of resolving #1866 by removing `AtLeast`. Uses of `AtLeast<Shared>` are replaced by a new `Reference` trait, which is implemented for `Shared` and `Exclusive`. This serves two purposes: First, it makes it explicit what this bound means. Previously, `AtLeast<Shared>` had an ambiguous meaning, while `Reference` means precisely that an invariant is either `Shared` or `Exclusive` and nothing else. Second, it paves the way for #1183, in which we may add new aliasing invariants which convey ownership. In that case, it will be important for existing methods to add `Reference` bounds when those methods would not be sound in the face of ownership semantics. We also inline the items in the `invariant` module, which were previously generated by macro. The addition of the `Reference` trait did not play nicely with that macro, and we will likely need to go further from the macro in order to fix #1839 – this fix will likely require making aliasing invariants meaningfully different than other invariants, for example by adding an associated type. Makes progress on #1866
joshlf
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 12, 2024
Previously, we supported the `AtLeast` bound, which was used to describe a subset relationship in which `I: AtLeast<J>` implied that `I` as at least as restrictive as `J`. However, as described in #1866, this incorrectly models invariants as monotonic. In reality, invariants both provide guarantees but also *require* guarantees. This commit takes a step in the direction of resolving #1866 by removing `AtLeast`. Uses of `AtLeast<Shared>` are replaced by a new `Reference` trait, which is implemented for `Shared` and `Exclusive`. This serves two purposes: First, it makes it explicit what this bound means. Previously, `AtLeast<Shared>` had an ambiguous meaning, while `Reference` means precisely that an invariant is either `Shared` or `Exclusive` and nothing else. Second, it paves the way for #1183, in which we may add new aliasing invariants which convey ownership. In that case, it will be important for existing methods to add `Reference` bounds when those methods would not be sound in the face of ownership semantics. We also inline the items in the `invariant` module, which were previously generated by macro. The addition of the `Reference` trait did not play nicely with that macro, and we will likely need to go further from the macro in order to fix #1839 – this fix will likely require making aliasing invariants meaningfully different than other invariants, for example by adding an associated type. Makes progress on #1866
joshlf
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 12, 2024
Previously, we supported the `AtLeast` bound, which was used to describe a subset relationship in which `I: AtLeast<J>` implied that `I` as at least as restrictive as `J`. However, as described in #1866, this incorrectly models invariants as monotonic. In reality, invariants both provide guarantees but also *require* guarantees. This commit takes a step in the direction of resolving #1866 by removing `AtLeast`. Uses of `AtLeast<Shared>` are replaced by a new `Reference` trait, which is implemented for `Shared` and `Exclusive`. This serves two purposes: First, it makes it explicit what this bound means. Previously, `AtLeast<Shared>` had an ambiguous meaning, while `Reference` means precisely that an invariant is either `Shared` or `Exclusive` and nothing else. Second, it paves the way for #1183, in which we may add new aliasing invariants which convey ownership. In that case, it will be important for existing methods to add `Reference` bounds when those methods would not be sound in the face of ownership semantics. We also inline the items in the `invariant` module, which were previously generated by macro. The addition of the `Reference` trait did not play nicely with that macro, and we will likely need to go further from the macro in order to fix #1839 – this fix will likely require making aliasing invariants meaningfully different than other invariants, for example by adding an associated type. Makes progress on #1866
joshlf
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 14, 2024
Previously, we supported the `AtLeast` bound, which was used to describe a subset relationship in which `I: AtLeast<J>` implied that `I` as at least as restrictive as `J`. However, as described in #1866, this incorrectly models invariants as monotonic. In reality, invariants both provide guarantees but also *require* guarantees. This commit takes a step in the direction of resolving #1866 by removing `AtLeast`. Uses of `AtLeast<Shared>` are replaced by a new `Reference` trait, which is implemented for `Shared` and `Exclusive`. This serves two purposes: First, it makes it explicit what this bound means. Previously, `AtLeast<Shared>` had an ambiguous meaning, while `Reference` means precisely that an invariant is either `Shared` or `Exclusive` and nothing else. Second, it paves the way for #1183, in which we may add new aliasing invariants which convey ownership. In that case, it will be important for existing methods to add `Reference` bounds when those methods would not be sound in the face of ownership semantics. We also inline the items in the `invariant` module, which were previously generated by macro. The addition of the `Reference` trait did not play nicely with that macro, and we will likely need to go further from the macro in order to fix #1839 – this fix will likely require making aliasing invariants meaningfully different than other invariants, for example by adding an associated type. Makes progress on #1866
github-merge-queue bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 14, 2024
Previously, we supported the `AtLeast` bound, which was used to describe a subset relationship in which `I: AtLeast<J>` implied that `I` as at least as restrictive as `J`. However, as described in #1866, this incorrectly models invariants as monotonic. In reality, invariants both provide guarantees but also *require* guarantees. This commit takes a step in the direction of resolving #1866 by removing `AtLeast`. Uses of `AtLeast<Shared>` are replaced by a new `Reference` trait, which is implemented for `Shared` and `Exclusive`. This serves two purposes: First, it makes it explicit what this bound means. Previously, `AtLeast<Shared>` had an ambiguous meaning, while `Reference` means precisely that an invariant is either `Shared` or `Exclusive` and nothing else. Second, it paves the way for #1183, in which we may add new aliasing invariants which convey ownership. In that case, it will be important for existing methods to add `Reference` bounds when those methods would not be sound in the face of ownership semantics. We also inline the items in the `invariant` module, which were previously generated by macro. The addition of the `Reference` trait did not play nicely with that macro, and we will likely need to go further from the macro in order to fix #1839 – this fix will likely require making aliasing invariants meaningfully different than other invariants, for example by adding an associated type. Makes progress on #1866
joshlf
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 14, 2024
Previously, we supported the `AtLeast` bound, which was used to describe a subset relationship in which `I: AtLeast<J>` implied that `I` as at least as restrictive as `J`. However, as described in #1866, this incorrectly models invariants as monotonic. In reality, invariants both provide guarantees but also *require* guarantees. This commit takes a step in the direction of resolving #1866 by removing `AtLeast`. Uses of `AtLeast<Shared>` are replaced by a new `Reference` trait, which is implemented for `Shared` and `Exclusive`. This serves two purposes: First, it makes it explicit what this bound means. Previously, `AtLeast<Shared>` had an ambiguous meaning, while `Reference` means precisely that an invariant is either `Shared` or `Exclusive` and nothing else. Second, it paves the way for #1183, in which we may add new aliasing invariants which convey ownership. In that case, it will be important for existing methods to add `Reference` bounds when those methods would not be sound in the face of ownership semantics. We also inline the items in the `invariant` module, which were previously generated by macro. The addition of the `Reference` trait did not play nicely with that macro, and we will likely need to go further from the macro in order to fix #1839 – this fix will likely require making aliasing invariants meaningfully different than other invariants, for example by adding an associated type. Makes progress on #1866
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Currently, the invariants enforced by
Ptr
are used strictly as lower bounds. We require code to prove soundness in order to increase the strictness of an invariant, for example to go from any alignment toAligned
:zerocopy/src/pointer/ptr.rs
Lines 779 to 781 in 1b037c8
...but we permit the opposite direction without restriction:
zerocopy/src/pointer/ptr.rs
Line 936 in 1b037c8
While it's not clear that our API currently permits any unsoundness, this general philosophy that some APIs are okay which are probably actually unsound.
Consider, for example, adding two seemingly innocuous methods to
Ptr
:forget_valid
modifies the validity invariant on an existingPtr
to beAny
as_maybe_uninit
turns aPtr<T>
into aPtr<MaybeUninit<T>, (..., ..., Valid)>
(sinceMaybeUninit
has no validity requirements)Taken together, these can be used to produce UB:
zerocopy/src/pointer/ptr.rs
Lines 946 to 974 in a3d4387
Indeed, Miri detects this UB:
This implies that we need to fundamentally rethink what invariants mean in
Ptr
. In particular:Ptr
(asas_maybe_uninit
does in this example)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: