Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] rust: miscdevice: add additional data to MiscDeviceRegistration

From: Christian Schrefl
Date: Mon Jun 02 2025 - 17:16:48 EST


On 31.05.25 2:23 PM, Benno Lossin wrote:
> On Fri May 30, 2025 at 10:46 PM CEST, Christian Schrefl wrote:
>> @@ -45,32 +46,46 @@ pub const fn into_raw<T: MiscDevice>(self) -> bindings::miscdevice {
>> /// # Invariants
>> ///
>> /// `inner` is a registered misc device.
>> -#[repr(transparent)]
>> +#[repr(C)]
>
> Why do we need linear layout? `container_of!` also works with the `Rust`
> layout.

That was a leftover from a previous version, fixed.

>
>> #[pin_data(PinnedDrop)]
>> -pub struct MiscDeviceRegistration<T> {
>> +pub struct MiscDeviceRegistration<T: MiscDevice> {
>> #[pin]
>> inner: Opaque<bindings::miscdevice>,
>> + #[pin]
>> + data: Opaque<T::RegistrationData>,
>> _t: PhantomData<T>,
>
> No need to keep the `PhantomData` field around, since you're using `T`
> above.
>

Fixed.

>> }
>>
>> -// SAFETY: It is allowed to call `misc_deregister` on a different thread from where you called
>> -// `misc_register`.
>> -unsafe impl<T> Send for MiscDeviceRegistration<T> {}
>> -// SAFETY: All `&self` methods on this type are written to ensure that it is safe to call them in
>> -// parallel.
>> -unsafe impl<T> Sync for MiscDeviceRegistration<T> {}
>> +// SAFETY:
>> +// - It is allowed to call `misc_deregister` on a different thread from where you called
>> +// `misc_register`.
>> +// - Only implements `Send` if `MiscDevice::RegistrationData` is also `Send`.
>> +unsafe impl<T: MiscDevice> Send for MiscDeviceRegistration<T> where T::RegistrationData: Send {}
>> +
>> +// SAFETY:
>> +// - All `&self` methods on this type are written to ensure that it is safe to call them in
>> +// parallel.
>> +// - `MiscDevice::RegistrationData` is always `Sync`.
>> +unsafe impl<T: MiscDevice> Sync for MiscDeviceRegistration<T> {}
>
> I would feel better if we still add the `T::RegistrationData: Sync`
> bound here even if it is vacuous today.

Since a reference the `MiscDeviceRegistration` struct is an
argument to the open function this struct must always be Sync,
so adding bounds here doesn't make much sense.

I'll add this a safety comment in `MiscdeviceVTable::open`
about this.

Is there a good way to assert this at build to avoid regessions?
>
>> impl<T: MiscDevice> MiscDeviceRegistration<T> {
>> /// Register a misc device.
>> - pub fn register(opts: MiscDeviceOptions) -> impl PinInit<Self, Error> {
>> + pub fn register(
>> + opts: MiscDeviceOptions,
>> + data: impl PinInit<T::RegistrationData, Error>,
>> + ) -> impl PinInit<Self, Error> {
>> try_pin_init!(Self {
>> + data <- Opaque::pin_init(data),
>> inner <- Opaque::try_ffi_init(move |slot: *mut bindings::miscdevice| {
>> // SAFETY: The initializer can write to the provided `slot`.
>> unsafe { slot.write(opts.into_raw::<T>()) };
>>
>> - // SAFETY: We just wrote the misc device options to the slot. The miscdevice will
>> - // get unregistered before `slot` is deallocated because the memory is pinned and
>> - // the destructor of this type deallocates the memory.
>> + // SAFETY:
>> + // * We just wrote the misc device options to the slot. The miscdevice will
>> + // get unregistered before `slot` is deallocated because the memory is pinned and
>> + // the destructor of this type deallocates the memory.
>> + // * `data` is Initialized before `misc_register` so no race with `fops->open()`
>> + // is possible.
>> // INVARIANT: If this returns `Ok(())`, then the `slot` will contain a registered
>> // misc device.
>> to_result(unsafe { bindings::misc_register(slot) })
>> @@ -93,13 +108,24 @@ pub fn device(&self) -> &Device {
>> // before the underlying `struct miscdevice` is destroyed.
>> unsafe { Device::as_ref((*self.as_raw()).this_device) }
>> }
>> +
>> + /// Access the additional data stored in this registration.
>> + pub fn data(&self) -> &T::RegistrationData {
>> + // SAFETY:
>> + // * No mutable reference to the value contained by `self.data` can ever be created.
>> + // * The value contained by `self.data` is valid for the entire lifetime of `&self`.
>
> Please add type invariants for these two requirements.
>
>> + unsafe { &*self.data.get() }
>> + }
>> }
>>
>> #[pinned_drop]
>> -impl<T> PinnedDrop for MiscDeviceRegistration<T> {
>> +impl<T: MiscDevice> PinnedDrop for MiscDeviceRegistration<T> {
>> fn drop(self: Pin<&mut Self>) {
>> // SAFETY: We know that the device is registered by the type invariants.
>> unsafe { bindings::misc_deregister(self.inner.get()) };
>> +
>> + // SAFETY: `self.data` is valid for dropping and nothing uses it anymore.
>
> Ditto.

I'm not quite sure how to formulate these, what do you think of:

/// - `inner` is a registered misc device.
/// - `data` contains a valid `T::RegistrationData` for the whole lifetime of [`MiscDeviceRegistration`]
/// - `data` must be usable until `misc_deregister` (called when dropped) has returned.
/// - no mutable references to `data` may be created.

>
>> + unsafe { core::ptr::drop_in_place(self.data.get()) };
>> }
>> }
>>
>> @@ -109,6 +135,13 @@ pub trait MiscDevice: Sized {
>> /// What kind of pointer should `Self` be wrapped in.
>> type Ptr: ForeignOwnable + Send + Sync;
>>
>> + /// The additional data carried by the [`MiscDeviceRegistration`] for this [`MiscDevice`].
>> + /// If no additional data is required than the unit type `()` should be used.
>> + ///
>> + /// This data can be accessed in [`MiscDevice::open()`] using
>> + /// [`MiscDeviceRegistration::data()`].
>> + type RegistrationData: Sync;
>
> Why do we require `Sync` here?

Needed for `MiscDeviceRegistration` to be `Send`, see response above.

>
> We might want to give this a shorter name?

I think its fine, but I am open to Ideas.

Cheers
Christian