-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 689
refactor: change name arg of memfd_create() to &NixPath #2431
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
SteveLauC
merged 6 commits into
nix-rust:master
from
SteveLauC:refactor/memfd_create_NixPath
Jun 8, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
a5fb074
refactor: change name arg of memfd_create() to &NixPath
SteveLauC 6c5ae86
style: format test/sys/mod.rs
SteveLauC aee31a0
disable test and see if this symbol is still needed for build
SteveLauC 2ee04f2
test: disable test under QEMU since symbol is unavailable
SteveLauC 57f866f
test: move imports to function body
SteveLauC 678a06f
test: remove the test
SteveLauC File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1 @@ | ||
Change the type of the `name` argument of `memfd_create()` from `&CStr` to `<P: NixPath>(name: &P)` |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is it possible we always use the
else
branch? Or does it have any drawback?From tokio-rs/tracing#1879 I'm afraid that using
libc::memfd_create
may fail on some old GNU toolchain.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right, because the glibc wrapper may only be available since a specific version, and if you are using an older glibc and this Nix wrapper, the code won't compile. But raw syscalls are inherently unsafe, Nix tries to avoid it if possible.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Honestly, this kind of thing has always been bothering me. I just created a tracking issue #2538 for these interfaces. May I ask about the issue you encountered with this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not in real-world, but a blocker I don't use nix at fast/logforth#80 (memfd.rs)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Perhaps we should wrap the raw syscall. 😪
If we want to discuss this further, let's discuss it there #2538.