-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 176
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
Avoid regression in consteval #2286
Conversation
let (data, mut metadata): (usize, usize) = core::mem::transmute(bytes); | ||
// n.b. be careful here, this might hit https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/99923 | ||
let data = bytes.as_ptr(); | ||
let mut metadata = bytes.len(); | ||
metadata /= core::mem::size_of::<T::ULE>(); | ||
Self::Borrowed(core::mem::transmute((data, metadata))) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
NB: the proper way to do this will be stable in 1.64:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yay!
@@ -257,7 +257,9 @@ where | |||
/// `bytes` need to be an output from [`ZeroSlice::as_bytes()`]. | |||
pub const unsafe fn from_bytes_unchecked(bytes: &'a [u8]) -> Self { | |||
// &[u8] and &[T::ULE] are the same slice with different length metadata. | |||
let (data, mut metadata): (usize, usize) = core::mem::transmute(bytes); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
FWIW the old code most likely has UB. Quoting from the transmute
docs:
Transmuting pointers to integers in a const context is undefined behavior. Any attempt to use the resulting value for integer operations will abort const-evaluation.
So, if from_bytes_unchecked
is ever called with a non-zero-sized slice (or a zero-sized slice that actually uses a pointer to some allocated memory), then this is definitely UB. This PR is a UB-fix, not a rustc-regression-workaround.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah I'm aware it's UB.
As I've stated in rust-lang/rust#99923, I still consider things like this a regression as long as the docs on undefined behavior are incomplete, scattered, and in flux, and avoiding UB is not practically possible for unsafe Rust programmers.
Avoids rust-lang/rust#99923