| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
| ... | |
| | | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
This lint is IMO inherently ill-conceived.
I have looked for the reasons why this might be thought to be a good
idea and there were basically two (and they are sort of contradictory):
I. "Calling ‘.clone()` on an Rc, Arc, or Weak can obscure the fact
that only the pointer is being cloned, not the underlying data."
This is the wording from
https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/v0.0.212/#clone_on_ref_ptr
It is a bit terse; we are left to infer why it is a bad idea to
obscure this fact. It seems to me that if it is bad to obscure some
fact, that must be because the fact is a hazard. But why would it be
a hazard to not copy the underlying data ?
In other languages, faliing to copy the underlying data is a serious
correctness hazard. There is a whose class of bugs where things were
not copied, and then mutated and/or reused in multiple places in ways
that were not what the programmer intended. In my experience, this is
a very common bug when writing Python and Javascript. I'm told it's
common in golang too.
But in Rust this bug is much much harder to write. The data inside an
Arc is immutable. To have this bug you'd have use interior mutability
- ie mess around with Mutex or RefCell. That provides a good barrier
to these kind of accidents.
II. "The reason for writing Rc::clone and Arc::clone [is] to make it
clear that only the pointer is being cloned, as opposed to the
underlying data. The former is always fast, while the latter can
be very expensive depending on what is being cloned."
This is the reasoning found here
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/2048
This is saying that *not* using Arc::clone is hazardous.
Specifically, that a deep clone is a performance hazard.
But for this argument, the lint is precisely backwards. It's linting
the "good" case and asking for it to be written in a more explicit
way; while the supposedly bad case can be written conveniently.
Also, many objects (in our codebase, and in all the libraries we use)
that are Clone are in fact simply handles. They contain Arc(s) (or
similar) and are cheap to clone. Indeed, that is the usual case.
It does not make sense to distinguish in the syntax we use to clone
such a handle, whether the handle is a transparent Arc, or an opaque
struct containing one or more other handles.
Forcing Arc::clone to be written as such makes for code churn when a
type is changed from Arc<Something> to Something: Clone, or vice
versa.
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| |\ \ \ \
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
chutney/setup: Wait for port 9150 to open after launching arti
Closes #367
See merge request tpo/core/arti!370
|
| | | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
This is not a replacement for a real startup protocol, but it may
help repair our CI.
|
| | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | |
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ |
|
| | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | |
|
| | |\ \ \ \ \ |
|
| |\| | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
| | | |/ / / /
| |/| | | | |
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \
| |_|/ / / /
|/| | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Refactor multiple runtime support in order to clean up documentation
Closes #326
See merge request tpo/core/arti!364
|
| | |\ \ \ \ \
| |/ / / / /
|/| | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Conflicts:
crates/arti-hyper/examples/hyper.rs
Trivially resolved. Hyper example still works.
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
Implement TLS in arti-hyper
See merge request tpo/core/arti!355
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
The *earlier* versions of these crates pull in *dependencies* that
violate our MSRV policy by requiring a *later* version of Rust.
Empirically, env_logger 0.5.4 would be enough, but practice here seems
to be to just say "cargo update".
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
As per
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/arti/-/merge_requests/355#note_2781816
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
I disagree with all these. Whatever.
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
As per
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/arti/-/merge_requests/355#note_2781820
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
As per
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/arti/-/merge_requests/355#note_2781819
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
Add tls_conn field to ArtiHttpConnector (and argument to constructor).
Introduce MaybeHttpsStream and use it in ArtiHttpConnection.
Have the example program pass the native TLS connector.
Currently the TLS connector and the HTTPS variant are not used, but
this commit is very noisy and fomrulaic, so I have split out the code
to use them into a separate commit for easier preparation and review.
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
This will be needed in a moment and doing it now makes the next patch
smaller and hence easier to read.
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
arti-hyper wants to be able to have a kind for TLS failure.
Given that arti-hyper is above arti-client, this shows that callers
above arti-client might need to invent kinds for their own errors.
Possibly this means we need other Other errors for other locations.
If we have pluggable components we might even want OtherTorError.
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
As per
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/arti/-/merge_requests/355#note_2781816
disable this here for now, pending a decision on !352
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \ \
| |_|_|/ / / /
|/| | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
add some error to retry_error instead of dropping it
See merge request tpo/core/arti!368
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \ \
| |/ / / / / /
|/| | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
remove usage of dbg!(..)
Closes #368
See merge request tpo/core/arti!367
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
it's making rust-nightly job fail
|
| |/ / / / / / |
|
| | | |\ \ \ \
| |_|/ / / /
|/| | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Fixed conflict in crates/arti-client/src/lib.rs as per tree
from
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/arti/-/merge_requests/364/#note_2782166
ie 13e55b8d7c22c26e55ba75823409b477f1bce66b
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
tor-circmgr: take_action: Handle Cancelled from the oneshot
Closes #365
See merge request tpo/core/arti!363
|
| | | | | | | | |
|