add teeos std impl #116565

Sword-Destiny · 2023-10-09T13:27:14Z

add teeos std library implement.

this MR is draft untill the libc update to 0.2.150

this MR is the final step for suppot rust in teeos.
first step(add target): #113480
second step(add teeos libc): rust-lang/libc#3333

rustbot · 2023-10-09T13:27:22Z

r? @cuviper

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

Sword-Destiny · 2023-10-09T13:30:51Z

r? @petrochenkov

petrochenkov · 2023-10-09T15:20:03Z

untill the libc update to 0.2.150

Do you mean 0.2.149? That seems to be enough.
Blocked on #116518 or #116527.
@rustbot blocked

rustbot · 2023-10-09T15:20:20Z

These commits modify the Cargo.lock file. Unintentional changes to Cargo.lock can be introduced when switching branches and rebasing PRs.

If this was unintentional then you should revert the changes before this PR is merged.
Otherwise, you can ignore this comment.

petrochenkov · 2023-10-09T15:22:14Z

All the changes are under library/std and library/panic_abort.
r? library

rustbot · 2023-10-09T15:22:17Z

Failed to set assignee to library: invalid assignee

Note: Only org members with at least the repository "read" role, users with write permissions, or people who have commented on the PR may be assigned.

petrochenkov · 2023-10-09T15:22:56Z

r? rust-lang/libs-impl
r? rust-lang/libs

rustbot · 2023-10-09T15:22:58Z

Team or group rust-lang/libs-impl not found.

rust-lang team names can be found at https://github.com/rust-lang/team/tree/master/teams.
Reviewer group names can be found in triagebot.toml in this repo.

Sword-Destiny · 2023-10-10T01:09:42Z

untill the libc update to 0.2.150

Do you mean 0.2.149? That seems to be enough. Blocked on #116518 or #116527. @rustbot blocked

some code merged after 0.2.149, so I need to wait 0.2.150
rust-lang/libc#3379

petrochenkov · 2023-11-02T12:28:33Z

cc @m-ou-se @Amanieu this is the library PR I mentioned.

m-ou-se · 2023-11-02T12:36:15Z

library/std/src/sys/teeos/time.rs

@@ -0,0 +1,348 @@
+//! copy from unix 100%, version 1.65


If this is an exact copy of unix/time.rs, it might be better to just import that file directly from mod.rs:

#[path = "../unix/time.rs"] pub mod time;

(And similar for thread_local_key.rs and perhaps more.)

some code under unix is not allowed to be imported

time.rs can not be imported, thread_local_key.rs is optimized.

It seems the issue is due to pub(in crate::sys::unix) in the unix implementation. Maybe it would be better to just change that to pub(crate) to allow the code to be reused (timespec is very widespread outside "unix" targets).

I imported unix timespec from the beginning, if it could be a pub(crate) I would be more than happy to do that.

Yes, please just change the Unix code to use pub(crate) to avoid the code duplication.

m-ou-se · 2023-11-02T12:42:20Z

library/std/src/sys/mod.rs

+    } else if #[cfg(target_os = "teeos")] {
+        mod teeos;
+        pub use self::teeos::*;
+        use teeos as unsupported;


What is this line for?

This line should be removed

bors · 2023-11-07T20:48:46Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #117617) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

rustbot · 2023-11-11T05:28:30Z

These commits modify compiler targets.
(See the Target Tier Policy.)

Sword-Destiny · 2023-11-25T09:52:55Z

@thomcc

Sword-Destiny · 2023-12-05T03:22:52Z

Is there any more questions?

library/std/src/sys/teeos/memchr.rs

library/std/src/sys/teeos/condvar.rs

library/std/src/sys/teeos/mod.rs

Amanieu · 2023-12-05T13:57:43Z

library/std/src/sys/teeos/rwlock.rs

@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+pub struct RwLock {}


It is better to implement this as a Mutex than not supporting RwLock at all. Even though it won't allow concurrent reads, it will still allow the type to work correctly.

I think I can use Cell for rwlock like unsupported/locks/rwlock.rs.

No, the Cell implementation is only correct for systems without thread support. You need to implement it using a mutex.

Then I prefer not to support rwlock and tell users in the manual that we do not support rwlock, for it's really different from mutex and rwlock interfaces. And a little hard :-) , I will try.

Maybe I overestimated the problem

Can you change the code to wrap Mutex instead of duplicating all the logic around pthread_mutex_t?

Ah, I originally thought I needed to do it through libc's interface. Is this the effect you expected?

use crate::sys::locks::mutex::Mutex; /// we do not supported rwlock, so use mutex to simulate rwlock. /// it's useful because so many code in std will use rwlock. pub struct RwLock { inner: Mutex, } impl RwLock { #[inline] pub const fn new() -> RwLock { RwLock { inner: Mutex::new() } } #[inline] pub fn read(&self) { unsafe { self.inner.lock() }; } #[inline] pub fn try_read(&self) -> bool { unsafe { self.inner.try_lock() } } #[inline] pub fn write(&self) { unsafe { self.inner.lock() }; } #[inline] pub unsafe fn try_write(&self) -> bool { unsafe { self.inner.try_lock() } } #[inline] pub unsafe fn read_unlock(&self) { unsafe { self.inner.unlock() }; } #[inline] pub unsafe fn write_unlock(&self) { unsafe { self.inner.unlock() }; } }

library/std/src/sys/teeos/thread.rs

Amanieu · 2023-12-05T14:06:29Z

library/std/src/sys/teeos/time.rs

@@ -0,0 +1,348 @@
+//! copy from unix 100%, version 1.65


It seems the issue is due to pub(in crate::sys::unix) in the unix implementation. Maybe it would be better to just change that to pub(crate) to allow the code to be reused (timespec is very widespread outside "unix" targets).

bors · 2023-12-06T02:37:19Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #118547) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

Signed-off-by: 袁浩 <yuanhao34@huawei.com>

Amanieu · 2023-12-07T04:30:19Z

@bors r+

bors · 2023-12-07T04:30:21Z

📌 Commit e353eb9 has been approved by Amanieu

It is now in the queue for this repository.

bors · 2023-12-07T05:22:23Z

⌛ Testing commit e353eb9 with merge 568f6a8...

bors · 2023-12-07T07:33:37Z

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Amanieu
Pushing 568f6a8 to master...

rust-timer · 2023-12-07T13:40:00Z

Finished benchmarking commit (568f6a8): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.3%	[-1.3%, -1.3%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.3%	[-5.1%, -1.5%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-3.3%	[-5.1%, -1.5%]	2

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.9%	[0.9%, 0.9%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.9%	[0.9%, 0.9%]	1

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 675.253s -> 675.831s (0.09%)
Artifact size: 314.17 MiB -> 314.22 MiB (0.02%)

rustbot assigned cuviper Oct 9, 2023

rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Oct 9, 2023

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot assigned petrochenkov and unassigned cuviper Oct 9, 2023

Sword-Destiny force-pushed the master branch from 11e15e0 to 6a7448c Compare October 9, 2023 13:34

rustbot added S-blocked Status: Blocked on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Oct 9, 2023

petrochenkov marked this pull request as ready for review October 9, 2023 15:20

rustbot assigned thomcc and unassigned petrochenkov Oct 9, 2023

m-ou-se reviewed Nov 2, 2023

View reviewed changes

Sword-Destiny force-pushed the master branch from 6a7448c to 68b54c1 Compare November 11, 2023 05:28

b49020 mentioned this pull request Nov 21, 2023

Upstream status for rustc aarch64-unknown-optee-trustzone target? apache/incubator-teaclave-trustzone-sdk#113

Open

Amanieu reviewed Dec 5, 2023

View reviewed changes

Sword-Destiny force-pushed the master branch from 68b54c1 to 8bb8339 Compare December 6, 2023 09:57

rustbot added the O-unix Operating system: Unix-like label Dec 6, 2023

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Sword-Destiny force-pushed the master branch 3 times, most recently from c6eaa91 to 7566d14 Compare December 6, 2023 13:16

add teeos std impl

e353eb9

Signed-off-by: 袁浩 <yuanhao34@huawei.com>

Sword-Destiny force-pushed the master branch from 7566d14 to e353eb9 Compare December 7, 2023 02:40

bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-blocked Status: Blocked on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work. labels Dec 7, 2023

bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Dec 7, 2023

bors merged commit 568f6a8 into rust-lang:master Dec 7, 2023
12 checks passed

rustbot added this to the 1.76.0 milestone Dec 7, 2023

This was referenced Dec 7, 2023

Specialize sleep_until implementation #118480

Open

Enable stack probes on aarch64 for LLVM 18 #118491

Merged

add teeos std impl #116565

add teeos std impl #116565

Conversation

Sword-Destiny commented Oct 9, 2023 • edited Loading

rustbot commented Oct 9, 2023

This comment has been minimized.

Sword-Destiny commented Oct 9, 2023

petrochenkov commented Oct 9, 2023

rustbot commented Oct 9, 2023

petrochenkov commented Oct 9, 2023

rustbot commented Oct 9, 2023

petrochenkov commented Oct 9, 2023

rustbot commented Oct 9, 2023

Sword-Destiny commented Oct 10, 2023

petrochenkov commented Nov 2, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bors commented Nov 7, 2023

rustbot commented Nov 11, 2023

Sword-Destiny commented Nov 25, 2023

Sword-Destiny commented Dec 5, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Sword-Destiny Dec 6, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Sword-Destiny Dec 6, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bors commented Dec 6, 2023

This comment has been minimized.

Amanieu commented Dec 7, 2023

bors commented Dec 7, 2023

bors commented Dec 7, 2023

bors commented Dec 7, 2023

rust-timer commented Dec 7, 2023

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Sword-Destiny commented Oct 9, 2023 •

edited

Loading

Sword-Destiny Dec 6, 2023 •

edited

Loading

Sword-Destiny Dec 6, 2023 •

edited

Loading