Stabilize GlobalAlloc and #[global_allocator] #51241
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
r? @aidanhs (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
Cc: @SimonSapin |
|
Oh, I have pretty much the same branch and was only waiting to add docs before I submit it… :) |
|
I wanted to see how that would impact me, so I went ahead but didn't bother with the doc. :) |
|
The job Click to expand the log.I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
glandium
force-pushed
the
globalalloc
branch
3 times, most recently
from
56439b4 to
dccf003
Compare
|
The job Click to expand the log.I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
SimonSapin
changed the title
SimonSapin
added
A-allocators
|
I’ve pushed additional commits to this PR. @glandium’s commits look good to me, mine still need review. In particular for the new docs and the API contracts they describe. Both tracking issues for features being stabilized have already finished FCP, but since we’re making last minute changes let’s have a final Final Comment Perdiod: @rfcbot fcp merge |
|
Team member @SimonSapin has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged teams: No concerns currently listed. Once a majority of reviewers approve (and none object), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up! See this document for info about what commands tagged team members can give me. |
rfcbot
added
proposed-final-comment-period
kennytm
added
the
relnotes
Amanieu
reviewed
May 31, 2018
src/libcore/alloc.rs
Outdated
| @@ -357,23 +360,28 @@ impl fmt::Display for AllocErr { | |||
| /// The `CannotReallocInPlace` error is used when `grow_in_place` or | |||
| /// `shrink_in_place` were unable to reuse the given memory block for | |||
| /// a requested layout. | |||
| // FIXME: should this be in libcore or liballoc? | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is used in the Alloc trait and therefore needs to be in libcore.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Indeed. Removed that comment.
Amanieu
reviewed
May 31, 2018
| impl fmt::Display for CannotReallocInPlace { | ||
| fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter) -> fmt::Result { | ||
| write!(f, "{}", self.description()) | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /// Augments `AllocErr` with a CapacityOverflow variant. | ||
| // FIXME: should this be in libcore or liballoc? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This could probably be moved to liballoc since it is only used by collections.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I moved it when I created the core::alloc module because it doesn’t depend on anything else, but with "collections" in the name maybe it belongs more where collections are define. I’ll leave this to whenever those APIs are stabilized.
Amanieu
reviewed
May 31, 2018
src/libcore/alloc.rs
Outdated
| /// | ||
| /// * Pointers returned from allocation functions must point to valid memory and | ||
| /// retain their validity until at least the instance of `GlobalAlloc` is dropped | ||
| /// itself. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does the concept of dropping an instance of GlobalAlloc really make sense? Should we just require pointers to be valid forever until explicitly freed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point, a static is never dropped. I copied this from Alloc docs but it doesn’t make sense here, removed.
|
The job Click to expand the log.I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
sfackler
reviewed
Jun 1, 2018
| /// library that aborts on memory exhaustion.) | ||
| /// | ||
| /// Clients wishing to abort computation in response to an | ||
| /// allocation error are encouraged to call the [`oom`] function, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I hoped it would, but it doesn’t when the target is not in the source crate (or its dependencies?). Will fix.
sfackler
reviewed
Jun 1, 2018
| /// or NULL to indicate reallocation failure. | ||
| /// If this returns a non-null pointer, then ownership of the memory block | ||
| /// referenced by `ptr` has been transferred to this alloctor. | ||
| /// The memory may or may not have been deallocated, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In what situation would the memory not be deallocated?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I’m not sure, I copied this form Alloc::realloc docs. Maybe when realloc succeeds in place and returns the same pointer? Would you rather I remove that sentence?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ownership of the memory block referenced by
ptrhas been transferred to this alloctor.
There's a typo on allocator. I'd add a "back" after transferred, too, to make it subtly clearer that ownership of the memory block started from this allocator.
|
@bors r=sfackler,SimonSapin |
|
📌 Commit 7f0d54d has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 12, 2018
Stabilize GlobalAlloc and #[global_allocator] This PR implements the changes discussed in #49668 (comment) Fixes #49668 Fixes #27389 This does not change the default global allocator: #36963
|
☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis |
This was referenced Jun 12, 2018
|
Now that docs are up-to-date on https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/std/alloc/index.html, it feels like the docs for the reexports should be "inlined" (e.g. |
moz-v2v-gh
pushed a commit
to mozilla/gecko-dev
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 13, 2018
Bug 1458161 added a rust OOM handler based on an unstable API that was removed in 1.27, replaced with something that didn't allow to get the failed allocation size. Latest 1.28 nightly (2018-06-13) has rust-lang/rust#50880, rust-lang/rust#51264 and rust-lang/rust#51241 merged, which allow to hook the OOM handler and get the failed allocation size again. Because this is still an unstable API, we explicitly depend on strict versions of rustc. We also explicitly error out if automation builds end up using a rustc version that doesn't allow us to get the allocation size for rust OOM, because we don't want that to happen without knowing. --HG-- extra : rebase_source : 6c097151046d088cf51f4755dd69bde97bb8bd8b
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 25, 2018
Prohibit `global_allocator` in submodules Background: #44113 is caused by weird interactions with hygiene. Hygiene is hard. After a lot of playing around, we decided that the best path forward would be to prohibit `global_allocator`s from being in submodules for now. When somebody gets it working, we can re-enable it. This PR contains the following - Some hygiene "fixes" -- things I suspect are the correct thing to do that will make life easier in the future. This includes using call_site hygiene for the generated module and passing the correct crate name to the expansion config. - Comments and minor formatting fixes - Some debugging code - Code to prohibit `global_allocator` in submodules - Test checking that the proper error occurs. cc #44113 #49320 #51241 r? @alexcrichton
This was referenced Sep 10, 2018
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 8, 2018
Add tracking issue for Layout methods (and some API changes) These methods are already useful when used with the stable global allocator API (stabilized in #51241). ```rust pub fn align_to(&self, align: usize) -> Result<Layout, LayoutErr>; pub fn padding_needed_for(&self, align: usize) -> usize; pub fn repeat(&self, n: usize) -> Result<(Layout, usize), LayoutErr>; pub fn extend(&self, next: Layout) -> Result<(Layout, usize), LayoutErr>; pub fn repeat_packed(&self, n: usize) -> Result<Layout, LayoutErr>; pub fn extend_packed(&self, next: Layout) -> Result<Layout, LayoutErr>; pub fn array<T>(n: usize) -> Result<Layout, LayoutErr>; ``` cc #32838 r? @SimonSapin
gecko-dev-updater
pushed a commit
to marco-c/gecko-dev-comments-removed
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 3, 2019
Bug 1458161 added a rust OOM handler based on an unstable API that was removed in 1.27, replaced with something that didn't allow to get the failed allocation size. Latest 1.28 nightly (2018-06-13) has rust-lang/rust#50880, rust-lang/rust#51264 and rust-lang/rust#51241 merged, which allow to hook the OOM handler and get the failed allocation size again. Because this is still an unstable API, we explicitly depend on strict versions of rustc. We also explicitly error out if automation builds end up using a rustc version that doesn't allow us to get the allocation size for rust OOM, because we don't want that to happen without knowing. UltraBlame original commit: 5182bca90d0609f182d5a7b6b48ed2ffbbce32c2
gecko-dev-updater
pushed a commit
to marco-c/gecko-dev-wordified
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 3, 2019
Bug 1458161 added a rust OOM handler based on an unstable API that was removed in 1.27, replaced with something that didn't allow to get the failed allocation size. Latest 1.28 nightly (2018-06-13) has rust-lang/rust#50880, rust-lang/rust#51264 and rust-lang/rust#51241 merged, which allow to hook the OOM handler and get the failed allocation size again. Because this is still an unstable API, we explicitly depend on strict versions of rustc. We also explicitly error out if automation builds end up using a rustc version that doesn't allow us to get the allocation size for rust OOM, because we don't want that to happen without knowing. UltraBlame original commit: 5182bca90d0609f182d5a7b6b48ed2ffbbce32c2
gecko-dev-updater
pushed a commit
to marco-c/gecko-dev-wordified-and-comments-removed
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 3, 2019
Bug 1458161 added a rust OOM handler based on an unstable API that was removed in 1.27, replaced with something that didn't allow to get the failed allocation size. Latest 1.28 nightly (2018-06-13) has rust-lang/rust#50880, rust-lang/rust#51264 and rust-lang/rust#51241 merged, which allow to hook the OOM handler and get the failed allocation size again. Because this is still an unstable API, we explicitly depend on strict versions of rustc. We also explicitly error out if automation builds end up using a rustc version that doesn't allow us to get the allocation size for rust OOM, because we don't want that to happen without knowing. UltraBlame original commit: 5182bca90d0609f182d5a7b6b48ed2ffbbce32c2
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR implements the changes discussed in #49668 (comment)
Fixes #49668
Fixes #27389
This does not change the default global allocator: #36963