In Rust, it is possible to `allow` particular warnings (diagnostics,
lints) locally, making the compiler ignore instances of a given warning
within a given function, module, block, etc.
It is similar to `#pragma GCC diagnostic push` + `ignored` + `pop` in C:
#pragma GCC diagnostic push
#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function"
static void f(void) {}
#pragma GCC diagnostic pop
But way less verbose:
#[allow(dead_code)]
fn f() {}
By that virtue, it makes it possible to comfortably enable more
diagnostics by default (i.e. outside `W=` levels) that may have some
false positives but that are otherwise quite useful to keep enabled to
catch potential mistakes.
The `#[expect(...)]` attribute [1] takes this further, and makes the
compiler warn if the diagnostic was _not_ produced. For instance, the
following will ensure that, when `f()` is called somewhere, we will have
to remove the attribute:
#[expect(dead_code)]
fn f() {}
If we do not, we get a warning from the compiler:
warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
--> x.rs:3:10
|
3 | #[expect(dead_code)]
| ^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default
This means that `expect`s do not get forgotten when they are not needed.
See the next commit for more details, nuances on its usage and
documentation on the feature.
The attribute requires the `lint_reasons` [2] unstable feature, but it
is becoming stable in 1.81.0 (to be released on 2024-09-05) and it has
already been useful to clean things up in this patch series, finding
cases where the `allow`s should not have been there.
Thus, enable `lint_reasons` and convert some of our `allow`s to `expect`s
where possible.
This feature was also an example of the ongoing collaboration between
Rust and the kernel -- we tested it in the kernel early on and found an
issue that was quickly resolved [3].
Cc: Fridtjof Stoldt <xfrednet@gmail.com>
Cc: Urgau <urgau@numericable.fr>
Link: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html#expect-lint-attribute [1]
Link: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/54503 [2]
Link: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/114557 [3]
Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Trevor Gross <tmgross@umich.edu>
Tested-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Reviewed-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240904204347.168520-18-ojeda@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
One way to explain what `ListArc` does is that it controls exclusive
access to the prev/next pointer field in a refcounted object. The
feature of having a special reference to a refcounted object with
exclusive access to specific fields is useful for other things, so
provide a general utility for that.
This is used by Rust Binder to keep track of which processes have a
reference to a given node. This involves an object for each process/node
pair, that is referenced by both the process and the node. For some
fields in this object, only the process's reference needs to access
them (and it needs mutable access), so Binder uses a ListArc to give the
process's reference exclusive access.
Reviewed-by: Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@proton.me>
Signed-off-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240814-linked-list-v5-10-f5f5e8075da0@google.com
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
