6.2 KiB
layout | title | description | category | tags | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
post | Understanding Heap Allocations in Rust | An introduction to the Rust memory model |
|
There's an alchemy of distilling complex technical topics into articles and videos
that change the way programmers see the tools they interact with on a regular basis.
I knew what a linker was, but there's a staggering amount of complexity in between
main()
and your executable.
Rust programmers use the Box
type all the time, but there's a rich history of the Rust language itself wrapped up in
how special it is.
In a similar vein, I want you to look at code and understand how memory is used; the complex choreography of operating system, compiler, and program that frees you to focus on functionality far-flung from frivolous book-keeping. The Rust compiler relieves a great deal of the cognitive burden associated with memory management, but we're going to step into its world for a while.
Let's learn a bit about memory in Rust.
Table of Contents
This post is intended as both guide and reference material; we'll work to establish an understanding of the different memory types Rust makes use of, then summarize each section for easy citation in the future. To that end, a table of contents is provided to assist in easy navigation:
- Foreword
- Stacking Up: Non-Heap Memory Types
- Piling On: Rust and the Heap
- Compiler Optimizations Make Everything Complicated
- Summary: When Does Rust Allocate?
- Appendix and Further Reading
Foreword
There's a simple checklist to see if you can skip over reading this article. You must:
- Only write
#![no_std]
crates - Never use
unsafe
- Never use
#![feature(alloc)]
For some uses of Rust, typically embedded devices, these constraints make sense. They're working with very limited memory, and the program binary size itself may significantly affect what's available! There's no operating system able to manage this "virtual memory" junk, but that's not an issue because there's only one running application. The embedonomicon is ever in mind, and interacting with the "real world" through extra peripherals is accomplished by reading and writing to exact memory addresses.
Most Rust programs find these requirements overly burdensome though. C++ developers
would struggle without access to std::vector
(except those hardcore no-STL guys), and Rust developers would struggle without
std::vec
. But in this scenario,
std::vec
is actually part of the alloc
crate,
and thus off-limits (because the alloc
crate requires #![feature(alloc)]
).
Or how would you use trait objects? There's no
Box<dyn Trait>
available to use for dynamic dispatch.
Whether writing code for embedded devices or not, the important thing in both situations is how much you know before your application starts about what your memory usage looks like. In the embedded device example, there's a small, fixed amount of memory you can possibly use. In a browser, however, you have no idea how large [google.com's home page] is until you start trying to download it. The compiler uses this information (or lack thereof) to optimize how memory is used; put simply, your code runs faster when the compiler can guarantee exactly how much memory your program needs while it's running. This post is all about understanding the optimization tricks the compiler uses, and how you can help the compiler and make your programs more efficient.
Now let's address some conditions and caveats before going much further.
This article will focus on "safe" Rust only; unsafe
mode allows you
to make use of platform-specific allocation API's (think the [libc] and [winapi]
implementations of [malloc]) that we'll ignore. We'll also assume a "debug"
build of libraries and applications (what you get with cargo run
and cargo test
)
and address (hehe) "release" mode at the end (cargo run --release
and cargo test --release
).
Finally, while the details are unlikely to change, the Rust docs include a warning worth repeating here:
Rust does not currently have a rigorously and formally defined memory model.
- the Rust docs
Stacking Up: Non-Heap Memory Types
Languages like Java and Python do an amazing job of simplifying the memory model needed for programmers. You can essentially treat
Most of the reason this post was written is because I Everyone's agreed that compilers are smart, and Rust is no exception.
Example: Why doesn't Vec::new()
go to the allocator?
Questions:
- What is the "Push" instruction? Why do we like the stack?
- How does Rust allocate arguments to the function?
- How does Rust allocate variables created in the function but never returned?
- How does Rust allocate variables created in the function and returned?
- How do Option<> or Result<> affect structs?
- How are arrays allocated?
- Legal to pass an array as an argument?
Piling On - Rust and the Heap
Example: How to trigger a heap allocation
Questions:
- Where do collection types allocate memory?
- Does a Box<> always allocate heap?
- Yes, with exception of compiler optimizations
- Passing Box vs. genericizing/monomorphization
- If it uses
dyn Trait
, it's on the heap.
- If it uses
- Other pointer types? Do Rc<>/Arc<> force heap allocation?
- Maybe? Part of the alloc crate, but should use qadapt to check
Compiler Optimizations Make Everything Complicated
Example: Compiler stripping out allocations of Box<>, Vec::push()
Appendix and Further Reading
[libc]: CRATES.IO LINK [winapi]: CRATES.IO LINK [malloc]: MANPAGE LINK