Update windows-bindgen to 0.58.0
This also switches from the bespoke `std` generated bindings to the normal `sys` ones everyone else uses.
This has almost no difference except that the `sys` bindings use the `windows_targets::links!` macro for FFI imports, which we implement manually. This does cause the diff to look much larger than it really is but the bulk of the changes are mostly contained to the generated code.
Remove unqualified form import of io::Error in process_vxworks.rs and fallback on remove_dir_impl for vxworks
Hi all,
This is to address issue #127084. On inspections it was found that io::Error refrences were all of qualified form and there was no need to add a unqualified form import. Also to successfully build rust for vxworks, we need to fallback on the remove_impl_dir implementations.
Thank you.
std: separate TLS key creation from TLS access
Currently, `std` performs an atomic load to get the OS key on every access to `StaticKey` even when the key is already known. This PR thus replaces `StaticKey` with the platform-specific `get` and `set` function and a new `LazyKey` type that acts as a `LazyLock<Key>`, allowing the reuse of the retreived key for multiple accesses.
Related to #110897.
Currently, `std` performs an atomic load to get the OS key on every access to `StaticKey` even when the key is already known. This PR thus replaces `StaticKey` with the platform-specific `get` and `set` function and a new `LazyKey` type that acts as a `LazyLock<Key>`, allowing the reuse of the retreived key for multiple accesses.
Remove `MaybeUninit::uninit_array()` and replace it with inline const blocks.
\[This PR originally contained the changes in #125995 too. See edit history for the original PR description.]
The documentation of `MaybeUninit::uninit_array()` says:
> Note: in a future Rust version this method may become unnecessary when Rust allows [inline const expressions](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/76001). The example below could then use `let mut buf = [const { MaybeUninit::<u8>::uninit() }; 32];`.
The PR adding it also said: <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/65580#issuecomment-544200681>
> if it’s stabilized soon enough maybe it’s not worth having a standard library method that will be replaceable with `let buffer = [MaybeUninit::<T>::uninit(); $N];`
That time has come to pass — inline const expressions are stable — so `MaybeUninit::uninit_array()` is now unnecessary. The only remaining question is whether it is an important enough *convenience* to keep it around.
I believe it is net good to remove this function, on the principle that it is better to compose two orthogonal features (`MaybeUninit` and array construction) than to have a specific function for the specific combination, now that that is possible.
This is possible now that inline const blocks are stable; the idea was
even mentioned as an alternative when `uninit_array()` was added:
<https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/65580#issuecomment-544200681>
> if it’s stabilized soon enough maybe it’s not worth having a
> standard library method that will be replaceable with
> `let buffer = [MaybeUninit::<T>::uninit(); $N];`
Const array repetition and inline const blocks are now stable (in the
next release), so that circumstance has come to pass, and we no longer
have reason to want `uninit_array()` other than convenience. Therefore,
let’s evaluate the inconvenience by not using `uninit_array()` in
the standard library, before potentially deleting it entirely.
std: refactor the TLS implementation
As discovered by Mara in #110897, our TLS implementation is a total mess. In the past months, I have simplified the actual macros and their expansions, but the majority of the complexity comes from the platform-specific support code needed to create keys and register destructors. In keeping with #117276, I have therefore moved all of the `thread_local_key`/`thread_local_dtor` modules to the `thread_local` module in `sys` and merged them into a new structure, so that future porters of `std` can simply mix-and-match the existing code instead of having to copy the same (bad) implementation everywhere. The new structure should become obvious when looking at `sys/thread_local/mod.rs`.
Unfortunately, the documentation changes associated with the refactoring have made this PR rather large. That said, this contains no functional changes except for two small ones:
* the key-based destructor fallback now, by virtue of sharing the implementation used by macOS and others, stores its list in a `#[thread_local]` static instead of in the key, eliminating one indirection layer and drastically simplifying its code.
* I've switched over ZKVM (tier 3) to use the same implementation as WebAssembly, as the implementation was just a way worse version of that
Please let me know if I can make this easier to review! I know these large PRs aren't optimal, but I couldn't think of any good intermediate steps.
`@rustbot` label +A-thread-locals
std::unix::fs: copy simplification for apple.
since we do support from macOs Sierra, we avoid the little runtime overhead with the fclonefileat symbol check.
Add PidFd::{kill, wait, try_wait}
#117957 changed `Child` kill/wait/try_wait to use its pidfd instead of the pid, when one is available.
This PR extracts those implementations and makes them available on `PidFd` directly.
The `PidFd` implementations differ significantly from the corresponding `Child` methods:
* the methods can be called after the child has been reaped, which will result in an error but will be safe. This state is not observable in `Child` unless something stole the zombie child
* the `ExitStatus` is not kept, meaning that only the first time a wait succeeds it will be returned
* `wait` does not close stdin
* `wait` only requires `&self` instead of `&mut self` since there is no state to maintain and subsequent calls are safe
Tracking issue: #82971
As long as a pidfd is on a child it can be safely reaped. Taking it
would mean the child would now have to be awaited through its pid, but could also
be awaited through the pidfd. This could then suffer from a recycling race.
Most modules have such a blank line, but some don't. Inserting the blank
line makes it clearer that the `//!` comments are describing the entire
module, rather than the `use` declaration(s) that immediately follows.
This makes their intent and expected location clearer. We see some
examples where these comments were not clearly separate from `use`
declarations, which made it hard to understand what the comment is
describing.
