Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 17 Jul 2023 13:47:40 +0000
In-Reply-To: <CUqkSCKfZbSOwonbc1HECGB3ah_8k404uGJFaebLi2oD8GScDzqRxZ350YdmljslxqUC4mqdvqpbBhD1wFSmCvpA4MhklUGnN6RB0Y8YlFo=@proton.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
References: <CUqkSCKfZbSOwonbc1HECGB3ah_8k404uGJFaebLi2oD8GScDzqRxZ350YdmljslxqUC4mqdvqpbBhD1wFSmCvpA4MhklUGnN6RB0Y8YlFo=@proton.me>
Message-ID: <20230717134740.1840206-1-aliceryhl@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/9] rust: sync: add `Arc::{from_raw, into_raw}`
From:   Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
To:     benno.lossin@proton.me
Cc:     alex.gaynor@gmail.com, aliceryhl@google.com,
        bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com, boqun.feng@gmail.com, gary@garyguo.net,
        jiangshanlai@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        ojeda@kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev,
        rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, tj@kernel.org,
        walmeida@microsoft.com, wedsonaf@gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@proton.me> writes:
>> +    /// This code relies on the `repr(C)` layout of structs as described in
>> +    /// <https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/type-layout.html#reprc-structs>.
> 
> Why is this in the documentation? I feel like it should be a normal code
> comment at the very start of the function.

In fact, I think we can drop this comment entirely. The motivation
behind using `Layout::extend` for computing `val_offset` is that its
correctness does not rely on how the repr(C) layout algorithm works.

(As opposed to how the previous implementation's correctness *does*
depend on knowing the repr(C) layout algorithm:
    Layout::new::<ArcInner<()>>().align_to(align).unwrap().pad_to_align().size()
)

>> +    ///
>> +    /// # Safety
>> +    ///
>> +    /// `ptr` must have been returned by a previous call to [`Arc::into_raw`]. Additionally, it
>> +    /// can only be called once for each previous call to [`Arc::into_raw`].
> 
> "it can only" -> "it must only"

Sounds good. I'll change it to use "must" in the next version.

Alice