Open GnomedDev opened 2 years ago
Another bit of unsoundness I've found, mem::Shared<T>
takes a T
, boxes it, stores a *mut T
and hands out &mut T
in a safe function (get
). This means a user can acquire 2 &mut
references to the T
which is a violation of the aliasing XOR mutability rule and results in instant UB in safe code.
Unfortunately, the Locked
mutex construct also appears to be completely ineffective for implementing Rust's memory model, See Locked::get()
:
pub fn get(&self) -> &mut T {
self.get_lock().lock();
let obj_ref = unsafe {
&mut *self.object_cell.get()
};
self.get_lock().unlock();
obj_ref
}
The lock is taken, but the &mut T
is emitted after the lock has been returned. Unsoundness is as simple as calling get()
twice.
@GnomedDev If you have any other places you have seen unsoundness, please lave them in the comments because I am looking into them.
mem::Shared<T>
is top on my list, though replacing it is difficult as the current design requires CoerceUnsized
which is annoying to work with and not designed to be implemented in libs.
I would honestly recommend avoiding this library and simply writing bindings to whatever C API there is yourself. I haven't touched NX dev since I opened this issue though, so there may be much better options.
The safe function
FileAccessor::read
takes aout_buf: *mut T
and from the documentation "Reads data in the given buffer". This should be unsafe as undefined behavior could be triggered by passing in a pointer not valid for writes.This was just the first thing I encountered that is obviously unsound in this library, it's usage of features directly marked as
incomplete_features
(eg: specialization) seems suspicious as well and should probably be removed if possible in my opinion and many other functions could be highly dangerous.Could a policy on safety be documented or a section added to README.md saying this library is highly in progress and currently has unsoundness/reliance on incomplete features?