Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-133411-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Message-ID: <2aaca204c110d33025c3b4fd7e6f67b78d72ab59.camel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [WIP 0/3] Memory model and atomic API in Rust
From: Philipp Stanner <pstanner@redhat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, Kent Overstreet
	 <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>
Cc: comex <comexk@gmail.com>, "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dave@treblig.org>, 
 Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>, rust-for-linux
 <rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org>,  linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev,  Miguel Ojeda
 <ojeda@kernel.org>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@gmail.com>, Wedson Almeida
 Filho <wedsonaf@gmail.com>, Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>,
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn?= Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com>, Benno Lossin
 <benno.lossin@proton.me>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@samsung.com>, Alice
 Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>, Andrea
 Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Peter
 Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>, David
 Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>, Jade Alglave <j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk>, Luc
 Maranget <luc.maranget@inria.fr>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
 Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>, Daniel Lustig <dlustig@nvidia.com>, Joel
 Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
 Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>, kent.overstreet@gmail.com, 
 Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, Marco Elver
 <elver@google.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,  Thomas Gleixner
 <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov
 <bp@alien8.de>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, x86@kernel.org,
 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,  Catalin Marinas
 <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
 linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2024 19:13:45 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wgQy+FRKjO_BvZgZN56w6-+jDO8p-Mt=X=zM70CG=CVBQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
	<CAHk-=whY5A=S=bLwCFL=043DoR0TTgSDUmfPDx2rXhkk3KANPQ@mail.gmail.com>
	 <u2suttqa4c423q4ojehbucaxsm6wguqtgouj7vudp55jmuivq3@okzfgryarwnv>
	 <CAHk-=whkQk=zq5XiMcaU3xj4v69+jyoP-y6Sywhq-TvxSSvfEA@mail.gmail.com>
	 <c51227c9a4103ad1de43fc3cda5396b1196c31d7.camel@redhat.com>
	 <CAHk-=wjP1i014DGPKTsAC6TpByC3xeNHDjVA4E4gsnzUgJBYBQ@mail.gmail.com>
	 <bu3seu56hfozsvgpdqjarbdkqo3lsjfc4lhluk5oj456xmrjc7@lfbbjxuf4rpv>
	 <CAHk-=wgLGWBXvNODAkzkVHEj7zrrnTq_hzMft62nKNkaL89ZGQ@mail.gmail.com>
	 <ZgIRXL5YM2AwBD0Y@gallifrey>
	 <CAHk-=wjwxKD9CxYsf5x+K5fJbJa_JYZh1eKB4PT5cZJq1+foGw@mail.gmail.com>
	 <160DB953-1588-418E-A490-381009CD8DE0@gmail.com>
	 <qyjrex54hbhvhw4gmn7b6l2hr45o56bwt6fazfalykwcp5zzkx@vwt7k3d6kdwt>
	 <CAHk-=wgQy+FRKjO_BvZgZN56w6-+jDO8p-Mt=X=zM70CG=CVBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.48.4 (3.48.4-1.fc38) 
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0

On Wed, 2024-03-27 at 12:07 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 at 11:51, Kent Overstreet
> <kent.overstreet@linux.dev> wrote:
> >=20
> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 09:16:09AM -0700, comex wrote:
> > > Meanwhile, Rust intentionally lacks strict aliasing.
> >=20
> > I wasn't aware of this. Given that unrestricted pointers are a real
> > impediment to compiler optimization, I thought that with Rust we
> > were
> > finally starting to nail down a concrete enough memory model to
> > tackle
> > this safely. But I guess not?
>=20
> Strict aliasing is a *horrible* mistake.
>=20
> It's not even *remotely* "tackle this safely". It's the exact
> opposite. It's completely broken.
>=20
> Anybody who thinks strict aliasing is a good idea either
>=20
> =C2=A0(a) doesn't understand what it means
>=20
> =C2=A0(b) has been brainwashed by incompetent compiler people.
>=20
> it's a horrendous crock that was introduced by people who thought it
> was too complicated to write out "restrict" keywords, and that
> thought
> that "let's break old working programs and make it harder to write
> new
> programs" was a good idea.
>=20
> Nobody should ever do it. The fact that Rust doesn't do the C strict
> aliasing is a good thing. Really.

Btw, for the interested, that's a nice article on strict aliasing:
https://blog.regehr.org/archives/1307

Dennis Ritchie, the Man Himself, back in the 1980s pushed back quite
strongly on (different?) aliasing experiments:
https://www.yodaiken.com/2021/03/19/dennis-ritchie-on-alias-analysis-in-the=
-c-programming-language-1988/


No idea why they can't just leave C alone... It's not without reason
that new languages like Zig and Hare want to freeze the language
(standard) once they are released.

P.

>=20
> I suspect you have been fooled by the name. Because "strict aliasing"
> sounds like a good thing. It sounds like "I know these strictly can't
> alias". But despite that name, it's the complete opposite of that,
> and
> means "I will ignore actual real aliasing even if it exists, because
> I
> will make aliasing decisions on entirely made-up grounds".
>=20
> Just say no to strict aliasing. Thankfully, there's an actual
> compiler
> flag for that: -fno-strict-aliasing. It should absolutely have been
> the default.
>=20
> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Linus
>=20