| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Disable clippy::clone_on_ref_ptr
See merge request tpo/core/arti!352
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
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.
|
| |/
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I wanted this while debugging something.
The ad-hoc impl Debug with f.debug_struct is getting repetitive
and I've already perpetrated one copy-paste mistake.
We should consider using something like the `educe` crate's Clone.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
This exception is no longer necessary now that the underlying CI bug
is fixed.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Closes #338.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This edge-case was there even before the migration of
595fe1ab881b94106649, but now it's more explicit and ought to be
revisited.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
(By our convention, these errors should say what we were trying to
spawn when the error occurred.)
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
This makes this like all the others, and is marginally shorter
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
And change the comments to slightly reinterpret these errors, to
relate to the circumstances rather than error generation site.
|
| | |
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
guardmgr: Use a better persistent data format
Closes #176
See merge request tpo/core/arti!233
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Previously we stored only one guard sample, in a state file called
"default_guards". That's not future-proof, since we want to have
multiple samples in the future. (`guard-spec.txt` specifies
separate samples for highly restrictive filters, and for bridge
usage.)
This patch changes our behavior so that we can store multiple
samples in a new "guards" file.
I had thought about automatically migrating from the previous file
format and location, but I don't think that's necessary given our
current (lack of) stability guarantees.
Closes #176.
|
| |/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This test should only fail very rarely (around 1/2.4e8) when guards
are chosen from a list of 20 with uniform probability. But that
wasn't what we were doing on the mock test network: we were choosing
from a list of 10 viable guards, with nonuniform probability.
As a fix, we change the test network probabilities so that the
guards _are_ chosen with a uniform probability for this test, and we
use a modified version of the test network where there are indeed 20
Guard-flagged relays with the required DirCache=2 protocol.
Closes #276.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We need this information to know if it's okay to migrate to a new
NetDir, or if we need to download more information first.
Part of #178.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
If we don't know a current microdescriptor for a guard, we can't use it
for multihop circuits, since we don't know its onion keys.
This is part of a fix for #178.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
`tor-rtcompat`'s `TlsConnector` trait previously included a method to
create a TLS-over-TCP connection, which implied creating a TCP stream
inside that method. This commit changes that, and makes the function
wrap a TCP stream, as returned from the runtime's `TcpProvider` trait
implementation, instead.
This means you can actually override `TcpProvider` and have it apply to
*all* connections Arti makes, which is useful for issues like arti#235
and other cases where you want to have a custom TCP stream
implementation.
This required updating the mock TCP/TLS types in `tor-rtmock` slightly;
due to the change in API, we now store whether a `LocalStream` should
actually be a TLS stream inside the stream itself, and check this
property on reads/writes in order to detect misuse. The fake TLS wrapper
checks this property and removes it in order to "wrap" the stream,
making reads and writes work again.
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Squash, refactor, and test !139 (Don't use same family as exit when picking a guard)
Closes #183
See merge request tpo/core/arti!173
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
This approach saves us from a linear search when picking guards.
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
There's not much reason to use a HashSet here, since we're just
going over the whole list.
This reverts commit 16e8489abbea1581b8e2 and does a little more
refactoring.
|
| | | |
|
| |/
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We want to only use TODO in the codebase for non-blockers, and open
tickets for anything that is a bigger blocker than a TODO. These
XXXXs seem like definite non-blockers to me.
Part of arti#231.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Also fix some commonwealth spellings that had slipped in.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Rust nightly claims that Vec might get its own retain_mut method,
which would potentially conflict with the extension method we've
grabbed from the retain_mut crate. To solve this, we're calling the
method explicitly.
|
| |\ |
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
params
|
| |/ |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
To do this at all neatly, I had to split out `tor-config` from
`arti-config` again, and putting the lower level stuff (paths,
builder errors) into tor-config. I also changed our use of
derive_builder to always use a common error type, to avoid
error type proliferation.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |\ |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
This is based on @eta's patches for !118 and !119: Since we already
have an unbounded channel, we don't need to use an elaborate mess of
one-shot senders. We can just use the unbounded_send() method,
which also lets us enqueue a message without having to await.
Closes #219.
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| |/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We define "coming back online" as happening when a guard attempt
succeeds, if that attempt that was launched when we seemed to be
offline.
We define "seeming to be offline" as having all of our primary
guards marked unreachable, and having received no incoming network
traffic in a while.
Closes #216.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Instead of putting a fully qualified name in the text, in most cases
we should just use the short name of the type or function we're
referring to.
In other words, instead of saying [`crate::module::Foo`], we should
typically say [`Foo`](crate::module::Foo).
|
| | |
|