summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/rust/pin-init/internal/src/init.rs
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2026-03-25rust: pin-init: replace `addr_of_mut!` with `&raw mut`Antonio Hickey
`feature(raw_ref_op)` became stable in Rust 1.82.0 which is the current MSRV of pin-init with no default features. Earlier Rust versions will now need to enable `raw_ref_op` to continue to work with pin-init. This reduces visual complexity and improves consistency with existing reference syntax. Suggested-by: Benno Lossin <lossin@kernel.org> Link: https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/issues/1148 Closes: https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/pin-init/issues/99 Signed-off-by: Antonio Hickey <contact@antoniohickey.com> Link: https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/pin-init/commit/e27763004e2f6616b089437fbe9b3719cd72bd5c [ Reworded commit message. - Benno ] Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net> Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260319093542.3756606-6-lossin@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Benno Lossin <lossin@kernel.org>
2026-03-25rust: pin-init: properly document let binding workaroundBenno Lossin
The three let bindings (in the bodies of `cast_init`, `cast_pin_init` and the `init!` macro) are used to avoid the following compiler error in Rust 1.78.0, 1.79.0, 1.80.0, 1.80.1, and 1.81.0 (just showing the one for `cast_init`, the others are similar): error[E0391]: cycle detected when computing type of opaque `cast_init::{opaque#0}` --> src/lib.rs:1160:66 | 1160 | pub const unsafe fn cast_init<T, U, E>(init: impl Init<T, E>) -> impl Init<U, E> { | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ | note: ...which requires borrow-checking `cast_init`... --> src/lib.rs:1160:1 | 1160 | pub const unsafe fn cast_init<T, U, E>(init: impl Init<T, E>) -> impl Init<U, E> { | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ note: ...which requires const checking `cast_init`... --> src/lib.rs:1160:1 | 1160 | pub const unsafe fn cast_init<T, U, E>(init: impl Init<T, E>) -> impl Init<U, E> { | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ = note: ...which requires computing whether `cast_init::{opaque#0}` is freeze... = note: ...which requires evaluating trait selection obligation `cast_init::{opaque#0}: core::marker::Freeze`... = note: ...which again requires computing type of opaque `cast_init::{opaque#0}`, completing the cycle note: cycle used when computing type of `cast_init::{opaque#0}` --> src/lib.rs:1160:66 | 1160 | pub const unsafe fn cast_init<T, U, E>(init: impl Init<T, E>) -> impl Init<U, E> { | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ = note: see https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/overview.html#queries and https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/query.html for more information Once we raise the nightly-MSRV above 1.81, we can remove this workaround. Link: https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/pin-init/commit/bb3e96f3e9a4f5fca80a22af883c7e5aa90f0893 [ Moved this commit after the previous one to avoid a build failure due to unstable features. Changed the cfg to use `USE_RUSTC_FEAUTURES`. - Benno ] Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net> Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260319093542.3756606-3-lossin@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Benno Lossin <lossin@kernel.org>
2026-03-12rust: pin-init: replace shadowed return token by `unsafe`-to-create tokenBenno Lossin
We use a unit struct `__InitOk` in the closure generated by the initializer macros as the return value. We shadow it by creating a struct with the same name again inside of the closure, preventing early returns of `Ok` in the initializer (before all fields have been initialized). In the face of Type Alias Impl Trait (TAIT) and the next trait solver, this solution no longer works [1]. The shadowed struct can be named through type inference. In addition, there is an RFC proposing to add the feature of path inference to Rust, which would similarly allow [2]. Thus remove the shadowed token and replace it with an `unsafe` to create token. The reason we initially used the shadowing solution was because an alternative solution used a builder pattern. Gary writes [3]: In the early builder-pattern based InitOk, having a single InitOk type for token is unsound because one can launder an InitOk token used for one place to another initializer. I used a branded lifetime solution, and then you figured out that using a shadowed type would work better because nobody could construct it at all. The laundering issue does not apply to the approach we ended up with today. With this change, the example by Tim Chirananthavat in [1] no longer compiles and results in this error: error: cannot construct `pin_init::__internal::InitOk` with struct literal syntax due to private fields --> src/main.rs:26:17 | 26 | InferredType {} | ^^^^^^^^^^^^ | = note: private field `0` that was not provided help: you might have meant to use the `new` associated function | 26 - InferredType {} 26 + InferredType::new() | Applying the suggestion of using the `::new()` function, results in another expected error: error[E0133]: call to unsafe function `pin_init::__internal::InitOk::new` is unsafe and requires unsafe block --> src/main.rs:26:17 | 26 | InferredType::new() | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ call to unsafe function | = note: consult the function's documentation for information on how to avoid undefined behavior Reported-by: Tim Chirananthavat <theemathas@gmail.com> Link: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/153535 [1] Link: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3444#issuecomment-4016145373 [2] Link: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/153535#issuecomment-4017620804 [3] Fixes: fc6c6baa1f40 ("rust: init: add initialization macros") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Benno Lossin <lossin@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com> Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net> Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260311105056.1425041-1-lossin@kernel.org [ Added period as mentioned. - Miguel ] Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
2026-03-06rust: pin-init: internal: init: document load-bearing fact of field accessorsBenno Lossin
The functions `[Pin]Init::__[pinned_]init` and `ptr::write` called from the `init!` macro require the passed pointer to be aligned. This fact is ensured by the creation of field accessors to previously initialized fields. Since we missed this very important fact from the beginning [1], document it in the code. Link: https://rust-for-linux.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/561532-pin-init/topic/initialized.20field.20accessor.20detection/with/576210658 [1] Fixes: 90e53c5e70a6 ("rust: add pin-init API core") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 6.6.y, 6.12.y: 42415d163e5d: rust: pin-init: add references to previously initialized fields Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 6.6.y, 6.12.y, 6.18.y, 6.19.y Signed-off-by: Benno Lossin <lossin@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net> Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260302140424.4097655-2-lossin@kernel.org [ Updated Cc: stable@ tags as discussed. - Miguel ] Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
2026-03-06rust: pin-init: internal: init: remove `#[disable_initialized_field_access]`Benno Lossin
Gary noticed [1] that the initializer macros as well as the `[Pin]Init` traits cannot support unaligned fields, since they use operations that require aligned pointers. This means that any code using structs with unaligned fields in pin-init is unsound. By default, the `init!` macro generates references to initialized fields, which makes the compiler check that those fields are aligned. However, we added the `#[disable_initialized_field_access]` attribute to avoid this behavior in commit ceca298c53f9 ("rust: pin-init: internal: init: add escape hatch for referencing initialized fields"). Thus remove the `#[disable_initialized_field_access]` attribute from `init!`, which is the only safe way to create an initializer handling unaligned fields. If support for in-place initializing structs with unaligned fields is required in the future, we could figure out a solution. This is tracked in [2]. Reported-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net> Closes: https://rust-for-linux.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/561532-pin-init/topic/initialized.20field.20accessor.20detection/with/576210658 [1] Link: https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/pin-init/issues/112 [2] Fixes: ceca298c53f9 ("rust: pin-init: internal: init: add escape hatch for referencing initialized fields") Signed-off-by: Benno Lossin <lossin@kernel.org> Acked-by: Janne Grunau <j@jannau.net> Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net> Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com> Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260302140424.4097655-1-lossin@kernel.org [ Adjusted tags and reworded as discussed. - Miguel ] Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
2026-01-17rust: pin-init: internal: init: simplify Zeroable safety checkBenno Lossin
The `Zeroable` type check uses a small dance with a raw pointer to aid type inference. It turns out that this is not necessary and type inference is powerful enough to resolve any ambiguity. Thus remove it. Suggested-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net> Tested-by: Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net> Signed-off-by: Benno Lossin <lossin@kernel.org>
2026-01-17rust: pin-init: internal: init: add escape hatch for referencing initialized ↵Benno Lossin
fields The initializer macro emits mutable references for already initialized fields, which allows modifying or accessing them later in code blocks or when initializing other fields. This behavior results in compiler errors when combining with packed structs, since those do not permit creating references to misaligned fields. For example: #[repr(C, packed)] struct Foo { a: i8, b: i32, } fn main() { let _ = init!(Foo { a: -42, b: 42 }); } This will lead to an error like this: error[E0793]: reference to field of packed struct is unaligned --> tests/ui/compile-fail/init/packed_struct.rs:10:13 | 10 | let _ = init!(Foo { a: -42, b: 42 }); | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ | = note: this struct is 1-byte aligned, but the type of this field may require higher alignment = note: creating a misaligned reference is undefined behavior (even if that reference is never dereferenced) = help: copy the field contents to a local variable, or replace the reference with a raw pointer and use `read_unaligned`/`write_unaligned` (loads and stores via `*p` must be properly aligned even when using raw pointers) = note: this error originates in the macro `init` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info) This was requested by Janne Grunau [1] and will most certainly be used by the kernel when we eventually end up with trying to initialize packed structs. Thus add an initializer attribute `#[disable_initialized_field_access]` that does what the name suggests: do not generate references to already initialized fields. There is space for future work: add yet another attribute which can be applied on fields of initializers that ask for said field to be made accessible. We can add that when the need arises. Requested-by: Janne Grunau <j@jannau.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251206170214.GE1097212@robin.jannau.net [1] Tested-by: Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net> Signed-off-by: Benno Lossin <lossin@kernel.org>
2026-01-17rust: pin-init: internal: init: add support for attributes on initializer fieldsBenno Lossin
Initializer fields ought to support the same attributes that are allowed in struct initializers on fields. For example, `cfg` or lint levels such as `expect`, `allow` etc. Add parsing support for these attributes using syn to initializer fields and adjust the macro expansion accordingly. Tested-by: Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net> Signed-off-by: Benno Lossin <lossin@kernel.org>
2026-01-17rust: pin-init: add `#[default_error(<type>)]` attribute to initializer macrosBenno Lossin
The `#[default_error(<type>)]` attribute can be used to supply a default type as the error used for the `[pin_]init!` macros. This way one can easily define custom `try_[pin_]init!` variants that default to your project specific error type. Just write the following declarative macro: macro_rules! try_init { ($($args:tt)*) => { ::pin_init::init!( #[default_error(YourCustomErrorType)] $($args)* ) } } Tested-by: Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net> Signed-off-by: Benno Lossin <lossin@kernel.org>
2026-01-17rust: pin-init: rewrite the initializer macros using `syn`Benno Lossin
Rewrite the initializer macros `[pin_]init!` using `syn`. No functional changes intended aside from improved error messages on syntactic and semantical errors. For example if one forgets to use `<-` with an initializer (and instead uses `:`): impl Bar { fn new() -> impl PinInit<Self> { ... } } impl Foo { fn new() -> impl PinInit<Self> { pin_init!(Self { bar: Bar::new() }) } } Then the declarative macro would report: error[E0308]: mismatched types --> tests/ui/compile-fail/init/colon_instead_of_arrow.rs:21:9 | 14 | fn new() -> impl PinInit<Self> { | ------------------ the found opaque type ... 21 | pin_init!(Self { bar: Bar::new() }) | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ | | | expected `Bar`, found opaque type | arguments to this function are incorrect | = note: expected struct `Bar` found opaque type `impl pin_init::PinInit<Bar>` note: function defined here --> $RUST/core/src/ptr/mod.rs | | pub const unsafe fn write<T>(dst: *mut T, src: T) { | ^^^^^ = note: this error originates in the macro `$crate::__init_internal` which comes from the expansion of the macro `pin_init` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info) And the new error is: error[E0308]: mismatched types --> tests/ui/compile-fail/init/colon_instead_of_arrow.rs:21:31 | 14 | fn new() -> impl PinInit<Self> { | ------------------ the found opaque type ... 21 | pin_init!(Self { bar: Bar::new() }) | --- ^^^^^^^^^^ expected `Bar`, found opaque type | | | arguments to this function are incorrect | = note: expected struct `Bar` found opaque type `impl pin_init::PinInit<Bar>` note: function defined here --> $RUST/core/src/ptr/mod.rs | | pub const unsafe fn write<T>(dst: *mut T, src: T) { | ^^^^^ Importantly, this error gives much more accurate span locations, pointing to the offending field, rather than the entire macro invocation. Tested-by: Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net> Signed-off-by: Benno Lossin <lossin@kernel.org>