Make HashMap fall back to RtlGenRandom if BCryptGenRandom fails
With PR #84096, Rust `std::collections::hash_map::RandomState` changed from using `RtlGenRandom()` ([msdn](https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/ntsecapi/nf-ntsecapi-rtlgenrandom)) to `BCryptGenRandom()` ([msdn](https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/bcrypt/nf-bcrypt-bcryptgenrandom)) as its source of secure randomness after much discussion ([here](https://github.com/rust-random/getrandom/issues/65#issuecomment-753634074), among other places).
Unfortunately, after that PR landed, Mozilla Firefox started experiencing fairly-rare crashes during startup while attempting to initialize the `env_logger` crate. ([docs for env_logger](https://docs.rs/env_logger/latest/env_logger/)) The root issue is that on some machines, `BCryptGenRandom()` will fail with an `Access is denied. (os error 5)` error message. ([Bugzilla issue 1754490](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1754490)) (Discussion in issue #94098)
Note that this is happening upon startup of Firefox's unsandboxed Main Process, so this behavior is different and separate from previous issues ([like this](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1746254)) where BCrypt DLLs were blocked by process sandboxing. In the case of sandboxing, we knew we were doing something abnormal and expected that we'd have to resort to abnormal measures to make it work.
However, in this case we are in a regular unsandboxed process just trying to initialize `env_logger` and getting a panic. We suspect that this may be caused by a virus scanner or some other security software blocking the loading of the BCrypt DLLs, but we're not completely sure as we haven't been able to replicate locally.
It is also possible that Firefox is not the only software affected by this; we just may be one of the pieces of Rust software that has the telemetry and crash reporting necessary to catch it.
I have read some of the historical discussion around using `BCryptGenRandom()` in Rust code, and I respect the decision that was made and agree that it was a good course of action, so I'm not trying to open a discussion about a return to `RtlGenRandom()`. Instead, I'd like to suggest that perhaps we use `RtlGenRandom()` as a "fallback RNG" in the case that BCrypt doesn't work.
This pull request implements this fallback behavior. I believe this would improve the robustness of this essential data structure within the standard library, and I see only 2 potential drawbacks:
1. Slight added overhead: It should be quite minimal though. The first call to `sys::rand::hashmap_random_keys()` will incur a bit of initialization overhead, and every call after will incur roughly 2 non-atomic global reads and 2 easily predictable branches. Both should be negligible compared to the actual cost of generating secure random numbers
2. `RtlGenRandom()` is deprecated by Microsoft: Technically true, but as mentioned in [this comment on GoLang](https://github.com/golang/go/issues/33542#issuecomment-626124873), this API is ubiquitous in Windows software and actually removing it would break lots of things. Also, Firefox uses it already in [our C++ code](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/5f88c1d6977e03e22d3420d0cdf8ad0113c2eb31/mfbt/RandomNum.cpp#25), and [Chromium uses it in their code as well](https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:base/rand_util_win.cc) (which transitively means that Microsoft uses it in their own web browser, Edge). If there did come a time when Microsoft truly removes this API, it should be easy enough for Rust to simply remove the fallback in the code I've added here
Remove potentially misleading realloc parenthetical
This parenthetical is problematic, because it suggests that the following is sound:
```rust
let layout = Layout:🆕:<[u8; 32]>();
let p1 = alloc(layout);
let p2 = realloc(p1, layout, 32);
if p1 == p2 {
p1.write([0; 32]);
dealloc(p1, layout);
} else {
dealloc(p2, layout);
}
```
At the very least, this isn't the case for [ANSI `realloc`](https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/memory/realloc)
> The original pointer `ptr` is invalidated and any access to it is undefined behavior (even if reallocation was in-place).
and [Windows `HeapReAlloc`](https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/heapapi/nf-heapapi-heaprealloc) is unclear at best (`HEAP_REALLOC_IN_PLACE_ONLY`'s description may imply that the old pointer may be used if `HEAP_REALLOC_IN_PLACE_ONLY` is provided).
The conservative position is to just remove the parenthetical.
cc `@rust-lang/wg-unsafe-code-guidelines` `@rust-lang/wg-allocators`
Rename `eq_ignore_case` to `starts_with_ignore_case`
The method doesn't test for equality. It tests if the object starts with
a given byte array, so its name is confusing.
Fix use of SetHandleInformation on UWP
The use of `SetHandleInformation` (introduced in #96441 to make `HANDLE` inheritable) breaks UWP builds because it is not available for UWP targets.
Proposed workaround: duplicate the `HANDLE` with `inherit = true` and immediately close the old one. Traditional Windows Desktop programs are not affected.
cc `@ChrisDenton`
Add rustc_nonnull_optimization_guaranteed to Owned/Borrowed Fd/Socket
PR #94586 added support for using
`rustc_nonnull_optimization_guaranteed` on values where the "null" value
is the all-ones bitpattern.
Now that #94586 has made it to the stage0 compiler, add
`rustc_nonnull_optimization_guaranteed` to `OwnedFd`, `BorrowedFd`,
`OwnedSocket`, and `BorrowedSocket`, since these types all exclude
all-ones bitpatterns.
This allows `Option<OwnedFd>`, `Option<BorrowedFd>`, `Option<OwnedSocket>`,
and `Option<BorrowedSocket>` to be used in FFI declarations, as described
in the [I/O safety RFC].
[I/O safety RFC]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/3128-io-safety.md#ownedfd-and-borrowedfdfd-1
Add MVP LLVM based mingw-w64 targets
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/72241
Those are `rustc` side changes to create working x86_64 and AArch64 Rustc hosts and targets.
Apart from this PR changes to various crates are required which I'll do once this is accepted.
I'm expecting more changes on `rustc` side later on as I cannot even run full testsuite at this moment because passing JSON spec breaks paths in various tests.
Tier 3 policy:
> A tier 3 target must have a designated developer or developers (the "target maintainers") on record to be CCed when issues arise regarding the target. (The mechanism to track and CC such developers may evolve over time.)
I pledge to do my best maintaining it, MSYS2 is one of interested consumers so it should have enough testing (after the releases).
> Targets must use naming consistent with any existing targets; for instance, a target for the same CPU or OS as an existing Rust target should use the same name for that CPU or OS. Targets should normally use the same names and naming conventions as used elsewhere in the broader ecosystem beyond Rust (such as in other toolchains), unless they have a very good reason to diverge. Changing the name of a target can be highly disruptive, especially once the target reaches a higher tier, so getting the name right is important even for a tier 3 target.
This triple name was discussed at [`t-compiler/LLVM+mingw-w64 Windows targets`](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/LLVM.2Bmingw-w64.20Windows.20targets)
> Target names should not introduce undue confusion or ambiguity unless absolutely necessary to maintain ecosystem compatibility. For example, if the name of the target makes people extremely likely to form incorrect beliefs about what it targets, the name should be changed or augmented to disambiguate it.
I think the explanation in platform support doc is enough to make this aspect clear.
> Tier 3 targets may have unusual requirements to build or use, but must not create legal issues or impose onerous legal terms for the Rust project or for Rust developers or users.
It's using open source tools only.
> The target must not introduce license incompatibilities.
It's even more liberal than already existing `*-pc-windows-gnu`.
> Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust license (MIT OR Apache-2.0).
Understood.
> The target must not cause the Rust tools or libraries built for any other host (even when supporting cross-compilation to the target) to depend on any new dependency less permissive than the Rust licensing policy. This applies whether the dependency is a Rust crate that would require adding new license exceptions (as specified by the tidy tool in the rust-lang/rust repository), or whether the dependency is a native library or binary. In other words, the introduction of the target must not cause a user installing or running a version of Rust or the Rust tools to be subject to any new license requirements.
There are no new dependencies/features required.
> Compiling, linking, and emitting functional binaries, libraries, or other code for the target (whether hosted on the target itself or cross-compiling from another target) must not depend on proprietary (non-FOSS) libraries. Host tools built for the target itself may depend on the ordinary runtime libraries supplied by the platform and commonly used by other applications built for the target, but those libraries must not be required for code generation for the target; cross-compilation to the target must not require such libraries at all. For instance, rustc built for the target may depend on a common proprietary C runtime library or console output library, but must not depend on a proprietary code generation library or code optimization library. Rust's license permits such combinations, but the Rust project has no interest in maintaining such combinations within the scope of Rust itself, even at tier 3.
As previously said it's using open source tools only.
> "onerous" here is an intentionally subjective term. At a minimum, "onerous" legal/licensing terms include but are not limited to: non-disclosure requirements, non-compete requirements, contributor license agreements (CLAs) or equivalent, "non-commercial"/"research-only"/etc terms, requirements conditional on the employer or employment of any particular Rust developers, revocable terms, any requirements that create liability for the Rust project or its developers or users, or any requirements that adversely affect the livelihood or prospects of the Rust project or its developers or users.
There are no such terms present/
> Neither this policy nor any decisions made regarding targets shall create any binding agreement or estoppel by any party. If any member of an approving Rust team serves as one of the maintainers of a target, or has any legal or employment requirement (explicit or implicit) that might affect their decisions regarding a target, they must recuse themselves from any approval decisions regarding the target's tier status, though they may otherwise participate in discussions.
I'm not the reviewer here.
> This requirement does not prevent part or all of this policy from being cited in an explicit contract or work agreement (e.g. to implement or maintain support for a target). This requirement exists to ensure that a developer or team responsible for reviewing and approving a target does not face any legal threats or obligations that would prevent them from freely exercising their judgment in such approval, even if such judgment involves subjective matters or goes beyond the letter of these requirements.
Again I'm not the reviewer here.
> Tier 3 targets should attempt to implement as much of the standard libraries as possible and appropriate (core for most targets, alloc for targets that can support dynamic memory allocation, std for targets with an operating system or equivalent layer of system-provided functionality), but may leave some code unimplemented (either unavailable or stubbed out as appropriate), whether because the target makes it impossible to implement or challenging to implement. The authors of pull requests are not obligated to avoid calling any portions of the standard library on the basis of a tier 3 target not implementing those portions.
> The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how to build for the target, using cross-compilation if possible. If the target supports running binaries, or running tests (even if they do not pass), the documentation must explain how to run such binaries or tests for the target, using emulation if possible or dedicated hardware if necessary.
Building is described in platform support doc, running tests doesn't work right now (without hacks) because Rust's build system doesn't seem to support testing targets built from `.json`.
Docs will be updated once this lands in beta allowing master branch to build and run tests without `.json` files.
> Tier 3 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or other developers in the community, to maintain the target. In particular, do not post comments (automated or manual) on a PR that derail or suggest a block on the PR based on a tier 3 target. Do not send automated messages or notifications (via any medium, including via `@)` to a PR author or others involved with a PR regarding a tier 3 target, unless they have opted into such messages.
Understood.
> Backlinks such as those generated by the issue/PR tracker when linking to an issue or PR are not considered a violation of this policy, within reason. However, such messages (even on a separate repository) must not generate notifications to anyone involved with a PR who has not requested such notifications.
Understood.
> Patches adding or updating tier 3 targets must not break any existing tier 2 or tier 1 target, and must not knowingly break another tier 3 target without approval of either the compiler team or the maintainers of the other tier 3 target.
I believe I didn't break any other target.
> In particular, this may come up when working on closely related targets, such as variations of the same architecture with different features. Avoid introducing unconditional uses of features that another variation of the target may not have; use conditional compilation or runtime detection, as appropriate, to let each target run code supported by that target.
I think there are no such problems in this PR.
Use default alloc_error_handler for hermit
Hermit now properly separates kernel from userspace.
Applications for hermit can now use Rust's default `alloc_error_handler` instead of calling the kernel's `__rg_oom`.
CC: ``@stlankes``
This reduces synchronization between threads when
debugging the atomic types.
Reducing the synchronization means that executions with and
without the debug calls will be more consistent,
making it easier to debug.
ExitCode::exit_process() method
cc `@yaahc` / #93840
(eeek, hit ctrl-enter before I meant to and right after realizing the branch name was wrong. oh, well)
I feel like it makes sense to have the `exit(ExitCode)` function as a method or at least associated function on ExitCode, but maybe that would hurt discoverability? Probably not as much if it's at the top of the `process::exit()` documentation or something, but idk. Also very unsure about the name, I'd like something that communicates that you are exiting with *this* ExitCode, but with a method name being postfix it doesn't seem to flow. `code.exit_process_with()` ? `.exit_process_with_self()` ? Blech. Maybe it doesn't matter, since ideally just `code.exit()` or something would be clear simply by the name and single parameter but 🤷
Also I'd like to touch up the `ExitCode` docs (which I did a bit here), but that would probably be good in a separate PR, right? Since I think the beta deadline is coming up.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/93959
This change was accepted in https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2580-ptr-meta.html
Note that this changes the signature of **stable** functions.
The change should be backward-compatible, but it is **insta-stable**
since it cannot (easily, at all?) be made available only
through a `#![feature(…)]` opt-in.
The RFC also proposed the same change for `NonNull::dangling`,
which makes sense it terms of its signature but not in terms of its implementation.
`dangling` uses `align_of()` as an address. But what `align_of()` should be for
extern types or whether it should be allowed at all remains an open question.
This commit depends on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93977, which is not yet
part of the bootstrap compiler. So `#[cfg]` is used to only apply the change in
stage 1+. As far a I know bounds cannot be made conditional with `#[cfg]`, so the
entire functions are duplicated. This is unfortunate but temporary.
Since this duplication makes it less obvious in the diff,
the new definitions differ in:
* More permissive bounds (`Thin` instead of implied `Sized`)
* Different implementation
* Having `rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable(ptr_metadata)`
Expand core::hint::unreachable_unchecked() docs
Rework the docs for `unreachable_unchecked`, encouraging deliberate use, and providing a better example for action at a distance.
Fixes#95865
Clarify what values `BorrowedHandle`, `OwnedHandle` etc. can hold.
Reword the documentation to clarify that when `BorrowedHandle`, `OwnedHandle`, or `HandleOrNull` hold the value `-1`, it always means the current process handle, and not `INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE`.
`-1` should only mean `INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE` after a call to a function documented to return that to report errors, which should lead I/O functions to produce errors rather than succeeding and producing `OwnedHandle` or `BorrowedHandle` values. So if a consumer of an `OwnedHandle` or `BorrowedHandle` ever sees them holding a `-1`, it should always mean the current process handle.
openbsd: convert futex timeout managment to Timespec usage
unbreak openbsd build after #96657
r? cuviper
please note I made `Timespec::zero()` public to be able to use it. OpenBSD is using relative timeout for `futex(2)` and I don't find simple way to use `Timespec` this way.
Apparently LLVM is unable to understand that if count_ones() == 1 then self != 0.
Adding `assume(align != 0)` helps generating better asm:
https://rust.godbolt.org/z/ja18YKq91
Since they work on byte pointers (by `.cast::<u8>()`ing them), there is
no need to know the size of `T` and so there is no need for `T: Sized`.
The `is_aligned_to` is similar, though it doesn't need the _alignment_
of `T`.
