Skip to content
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

Refactor fd read/write #3852

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Refactor fd read/write #3852

wants to merge 8 commits into from

Conversation

tiif
Copy link
Contributor

@tiif tiif commented Aug 29, 2024

This PR passed the responsibility of reading to user supplied buffer and dest place to each implementation of FileDescription::read/write/pread/pwrite.

This is part of #3665.

src/shims/unix/fd.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/shims/unix/fd.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/shims/unix/fd.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/shims/unix/fd.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@tiif
Copy link
Contributor Author

tiif commented Aug 31, 2024

Thanks for the feedback, I will slowly address them. So currently read_byte_helper is writing bytes to the user supplied buffer pointer, and write the total number of bytes written to the dest place. Right now, each FileDescription::read is responsible to writing to the buffer by calling read_byte_helper. A lot of error handling doesn't make sense yet, but feel free to suggest improvement while I am working on it.

Currently, I still need to:

  1. let FileDescription::write to do the actual writing
  2. get FileDescription::pread to do the actual reading by calling read_byte_helper
  3. Simplify error handling, there are a few InterpResult that I want to get rid of

src/shims/unix/fd.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/shims/unix/fd.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@tiif
Copy link
Contributor Author

tiif commented Sep 2, 2024

Wow, the only difference between 7721683 and dc74101 is just one inlined variable, but dc74101 somehow failed ./miri test fs but 7721683 passed? That's pretty unexpected.

EDIT: After a closer look, this should be caused by the variable bytes, when it is inlined, bytes.to_vec() gets evaluated before (&mut &self.file).read(bytes). Since to_vec creates a clone, so even though bytes is updated afterwards, the clone won't be updated.

I reverted the entire inline variable commit.

@RalfJung
Copy link
Member

RalfJung commented Sep 2, 2024

You changed evaluation order:

// Runs `bytes.to_vec()` after `Read::read.
let result = Read::read(&mut { self }, bytes);
ecx.read_byte_helper(ptr, bytes.to_vec(), result, dest)?;
// Runs `bytes.to_vec()` before `Read::read.
ecx.read_byte_helper(ptr, bytes.to_vec(), Read::read(&mut { self }, bytes), dest)?;

So maybe that explains the difference.

@tiif
Copy link
Contributor Author

tiif commented Sep 3, 2024

Is there any nice way to deref Pointer type to a place? So for eventfd, I perhaps can directly write to the user supplied buffer using write_int:

    fn read_byte_helper_ev(
        &mut self,
        buf_place: &MPlaceTy<'tcx>,
        read_val: u64,
        result: io::Result<usize>,
        dest: &MPlaceTy<'tcx>,
    ) -> InterpResult<'tcx> {
        let this = self.eval_context_mut();
        // `File::read` never returns a value larger than `count`, so this cannot fail.
        match result.map(|c| i64::try_from(c).unwrap()) {
            // try to pass this the write_ptr inside write
            // Pass the pointer inside the write function.
            Ok(read_bytes) => {
                // Write to the user supplied buffer.
                this.write_int(read_val, buf_place)?;  // <-- Here!!
                // Write to the function return value place.
                this.write_int(read_bytes, dest)?;
                return Ok(());
            }
            Err(e) => {
                this.set_last_error_from_io_error(e)?;
                this.write_int(-1, dest)?;
                return Ok(());
            }
        }
    }

Unfortunately I can't just use deref_pointer_as for the Pointer type because it doesn't implement Readable:

    |
71  |         let buf_place = ecx.deref_pointer_as(&ptr, ecx.machine.layouts.u64);
    |                             ---------------- ^^^^ the trait `rustc_const_eval::interpret::Readable<'_, machine::Provenance>` is not implemented for `rustc_const_eval::interpret::Pointer<std::option::Option<machine::Provenance>>`
    |                             |
    |                             required by a bound introduced by this call
    |
    = help: the following other types implement trait `rustc_const_eval::interpret::Readable<'tcx, Prov>`:
              rustc_const_eval::interpret::ImmTy<'tcx, Prov>
              rustc_const_eval::interpret::MPlaceTy<'tcx, Prov>
              rustc_const_eval::interpret::OpTy<'tcx, Prov>

We might also need to keep it as a Pointer type (instead of using OpTy) because we need to check pointer access in EvalContextExt::read

        // Check that the *entire* buffer is actually valid memory.
        this.check_ptr_access(buf, Size::from_bytes(count), CheckInAllocMsg::MemoryAccessTest)?;

@RalfJung
Copy link
Member

RalfJung commented Sep 3, 2024

Yes, ptr_to_mplace takes a Pointer and a Layout and makes it an MPlace.

Instead of passing it as a pointer, you could also try passing it as an ImmTy. That implements Readable. But I think passing as Pointer is probably the better choice.

src/shims/unix/linux/eventfd.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@tiif
Copy link
Contributor Author

tiif commented Sep 4, 2024

Another idea here:

These are all the file description that implements FileDescription::read, and what they did is

  1. fs.rs:
    • File::read takes in &mut [u8] and writes the bytes to it
  2. fd.rs:
    • Read::read takes in &mut [u8] and writes the bytes to it
  3. unnamed_socket.rs:
    • VecDeque::read take in &mut [u8] writes to it
  4. eventfd.rs:
    • Turning u64 to &mut [u8]

So for the first three read, I perhaps can turn the user supplied buffer into &mut [u8] and let all these different read apis directly write to it, but I am still not sure how to handle eventfd. It is slightly different because currently what it is doing is turning u64 to &mut [u8] to match the implementation of all the other file description above.

@RalfJung
Copy link
Member

RalfJung commented Sep 4, 2024 via email

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Sep 9, 2024

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #3867) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@RalfJung RalfJung added the S-waiting-on-author Status: Waiting for the PR author to address review comments label Sep 11, 2024
@tiif
Copy link
Contributor Author

tiif commented Sep 11, 2024

This is partially blocked by rust-lang/rust#130215 as I'd need the ptr_to_mplace_unalignedto pass the tests.

src/shims/unix/fd.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/shims/unix/fd.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/shims/unix/fs.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@tiif tiif marked this pull request as ready for review September 16, 2024 14:58
@tiif
Copy link
Contributor Author

tiif commented Sep 16, 2024

@rustbot ready

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Waiting for a review to complete and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: Waiting for the PR author to address review comments labels Sep 16, 2024
@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Sep 16, 2024

Please squash the commits, then r=me

@bors delegate+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Sep 16, 2024

✌️ @tiif, you can now approve this pull request!

If @oli-obk told you to "r=me" after making some further change, please make that change, then do @bors r=@oli-obk

@tiif
Copy link
Contributor Author

tiif commented Sep 16, 2024

@bors r=@oli-obk

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Sep 16, 2024

📌 Commit de515da has been approved by oli-obk

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Sep 16, 2024

⌛ Testing commit de515da with merge 8311557...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 16, 2024
Refactor fd read/write

This PR passed the responsibility of reading to user supplied buffer and dest place to each implementation of ``FileDescription::read/write/pread/pwrite``.

This is part of #3665.
@RalfJung
Copy link
Member

@bors r-
Since since affects Miri globally, I'm going to have some comments as well, sorry.

src/shims/unix/fd.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/shims/unix/fd.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/shims/unix/fd.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/shims/unix/fd.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/shims/unix/fd.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/shims/unix/fs.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines +70 to +71
// eventfd read at the size of u64.
let buf_place = ecx.ptr_to_mplace_unaligned(ptr, ecx.machine.layouts.u64);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please do this after the size check.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Unfortunately inside the size check, return return_read_bytes_and_count_ev(&buf_place, None, result, dest, ecx); is called, so we need buf_place. I probably should separate these two code path in return_read_bytes_and_count into different function.

        match result {
            Ok(read_bytes) => {
                // If reading to `bytes` did not fail, we write those bytes to the buffer.
                // Crucially, if fewer than `bytes.len()` bytes were read, only write
                // that much into the output buffer!
                this.write_bytes_ptr(buf, bytes[..read_bytes].iter().copied())?;
                // The actual read size is always less than what got originally requested so this cannot fail.
                this.write_int(u64::try_from(read_bytes).unwrap(), dest)?;
                return Ok(());
            }
            Err(e) => {
                this.set_last_error_from_io_error(e)?;
                this.write_int(-1, dest)?;
                return Ok(());
            }
        }

This is the same issue as #3852 (comment).

@@ -150,7 +157,8 @@ impl FileDescription for Event {
// types for current file description.
ecx.check_and_update_readiness(self_ref)?;

Ok(Ok(U64_ARRAY_SIZE))
let result = Ok(U64_ARRAY_SIZE);
ecx.return_written_byte_count_or_error(result, dest)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why is return_written_byte_count_or_error a helper function? Every single caller fixes either Err or Ok so this is funneling through a Result without a good reason, it just makes the code harder to follow.

If there is any helper we want here, it is a new very generic helper that sets the last errors and also writes -1 to dest. But that's probably better done in a future PR, for now you can just copy those 2 lines here I would say, like we do everywhere else.

self.counter.set(0);
// When any of the event happened, we check and update the status of all supported event
// types for current file description.
ecx.check_and_update_readiness(self_ref)?;

return Ok(Ok(U64_ARRAY_SIZE));
return_read_bytes_and_count_ev(&buf_place, Some(counter), result, dest, ecx)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why is return_read_bytes_and_count_ev a helper function? Every single caller fixes either Err or Ok so this is funneling through a Result without a good reason, it just makes the code harder to follow.

If there is any helper we want here, it is a new very generic helper that sets the last errors and also writes -1 to dest. But that's probably better done in a future PR, for now you can just copy those 2 lines here I would say, like we do everywhere else.

src/shims/unix/linux/eventfd.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Sep 16, 2024

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 8311557 (8311557d994abbd31c9d5b75a4a3f89be3a40697)

tiif and others added 5 commits September 17, 2024 16:16
Co-authored-by: Ralf Jung <post@ralfj.de>
Co-authored-by: Ralf Jung <post@ralfj.de>
Co-authored-by: Ralf Jung <post@ralfj.de>
Co-authored-by: Ralf Jung <post@ralfj.de>
@RalfJung RalfJung added S-waiting-on-author Status: Waiting for the PR author to address review comments and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Waiting for a review to complete labels Sep 17, 2024
@tiif
Copy link
Contributor Author

tiif commented Sep 17, 2024

Instead of separating the helper with read and write, it would be better to separate it according to this two code path:

        match result {
            Ok(read_bytes) => {
                // If reading to `bytes` did not fail, we write those bytes to the buffer.
                // Crucially, if fewer than `bytes.len()` bytes were read, only write
                // that much into the output buffer!
                this.write_bytes_ptr(buf, bytes[..read_bytes].iter().copied())?;
                // The actual read size is always less than what got originally requested so this cannot fail.
                this.write_int(u64::try_from(read_bytes).unwrap(), dest)?;
                return Ok(());
            }
            Err(e) => {
                this.set_last_error_from_io_error(e)?;
                this.write_int(-1, dest)?;
                return Ok(());
            }
        }

or use try_unwrap_io_result.

As this could be done in a new PR,

@rustbot ready

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Waiting for a review to complete and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: Waiting for the PR author to address review comments labels Sep 17, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-review Status: Waiting for a review to complete
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants