Skip to content

Add Atomic*::from_mut_slice #94384

New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

#

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 1, 2022
Merged

Add Atomic*::from_mut_slice #94384

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 1, 2022

Conversation

cuviper
Copy link
Member

@cuviper cuviper commented Feb 25, 2022

Tracking issue #76314 for from_mut has a question about the possibility of from_mut_slice, and I found a real case for it. A user in the forum had a parallelism problem that could be solved by open-indexing updates to a vector of atomics, but they didn't want to affect the other code using that vector. Using from_mut_slice, they could borrow that data as atomics just long enough for their parallel loop.

ref: https://users.rust-lang.org/t/sharing-vector-with-rayon-par-iter-correctly/72022

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Contributor

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Feb 25, 2022
@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

Generally makes sense to me, though feels a bit unfortunate that we need a separate function - it seems like if you have stateless &mut T -> &mut U, you can do &mut [T] -> &mut [U], right?

Probably not worth not doing this, but it feels like maybe there's a missing abstraction of some kind here - feels similar to https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/std/cell/struct.Cell.html#method.as_slice_of_cells in some ways.

r? @dtolnay for libs-api sign off

@cuviper
Copy link
Member Author

cuviper commented Feb 26, 2022

it seems like if you have stateless &mut T -> &mut U, you can do &mut [T] -> &mut [U], right?

Yes, the constraint is almost like T: AsMut<U>, but they have to be the same size and return the same address, no dereferencing. It's similar to coercion too. Maybe something like unsafe trait CoerceMut<T> with a blanket impl for slices?

dtolnay
dtolnay approved these changes Feb 28, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@dtolnay dtolnay left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice!

@dtolnay
Copy link
Member

dtolnay commented Feb 28, 2022

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Feb 28, 2022

📌 Commit d3d2a27 has been approved by dtolnay

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Feb 28, 2022
@dtolnay dtolnay mentioned this pull request Feb 28, 2022
Open
6 tasks
@Dylan-DPC Dylan-DPC mentioned this pull request Mar 1, 2022
Merged
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 1, 2022
@bors
Auto merge of rust-lang#94469 - Dylan-DPC:rollup-2tcq6s5, r=Dylan-DPC
6343edf 
Rollup of 7 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#91545 (Generalize "remove `&`"  and "add `*`" suggestions to more than one deref)
 - rust-lang#93385 (Rustdoc ty consistency fixes)
 - rust-lang#93926 (Lint against more useless `#[must_use]` attributes)
 - rust-lang#94094 (use BOOL for TCP_NODELAY setsockopt value on Windows)
 - rust-lang#94384 (Add Atomic*::from_mut_slice)
 - rust-lang#94448 (5 - Make more use of `let_chains`)
 - rust-lang#94452 (Sync portable-simd for bitmasks &c.)

Failed merges:

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit 5bd119d into rust-lang:master Mar 1, 2022
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.61.0 milestone Mar 1, 2022
@m-ou-se
Copy link
Member

m-ou-se commented Mar 3, 2022

:D Coincidentally I just got to my to do list item that says "Add atomic from_mut_slice" and noticed you just added it a few days ago. Nice!

@WaffleLapkin
Copy link
Member

Should we also introduce the inverse operation? i.e. &mut [Atomic*] -> &mut [*]?

just like Atomic*::from_mut has an inverse Atomic*::get_mut.

@cuviper
Copy link
Member Author

cuviper commented Mar 10, 2022

@WaffleLapkin that's a bit awkward because I don't think we can have a &mut [self] method. So it would either have to be a method on actual slice impls, or else an explicit associated method like Atomic*::get_mut_slice(this: &mut [Self]).

@WaffleLapkin
Copy link
Member

For me an explicit associated method seems fine. Can make a PR 👀

@WaffleLapkin WaffleLapkin mentioned this pull request Mar 10, 2022
Merged
matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2022
@matthiaskrgr
Rollup merge of rust-lang#94816 - WaffleLapkin:atomic_get_mut_slice, …
8dad2d1 
…r=Mark-Simulacrum

Add `Atomic*::get_mut_slice`

This PR adds the inverse of `Atomic*::from_mut_slice` introduced in rust-lang#94384 with the following API:
```rust
// core::sync::atomic

impl Atomic* {
    fn get_mut_slice(this: &mut [Self]) -> &mut [*];
}
```

cc `@cuviper`

-----

For now I've used the same tracking issue as `Atomic*::from_mut_slice`, should I open a new one?
@cuviper cuviper deleted the atomic-slice branch April 12, 2022 17:54
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Reviewers

@dtolnay dtolnay dtolnay approved these changes

Assignees

@dtolnay dtolnay

Labels
S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
1.61.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
8 participants
@cuviper @rust-highfive @Mark-Simulacrum @dtolnay @bors @m-ou-se @WaffleLapkin @rustbot