Document that BytesMut::{reserve,try_reserve} doesn't preserve unused capacity#808
Merged
Darksonn merged 1 commit intotokio-rs:masterfrom Nov 28, 2025
Merged
Conversation
Darksonn
reviewed
Nov 24, 2025
paolobarbolini
force-pushed
the
bytesmut-reserve-footgun
branch
from
1151d5f to
dec048b
Compare
paolobarbolini
force-pushed
the
bytesmut-reserve-footgun
branch
from
dec048b to
70efacc
Compare
paolobarbolini
changed the title
BytesMut::reserve may not preserve memory outside 0..lenBytesMut::{reserve,try_reserve} doesn't preserve unused capacity
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This documents that
BytesMutmay not preserve the memory outside of0..lenafter callingBytesMut::reserve. It may for example discard all of it, and replace it with uninit memory in the fallback case, or even shift it causing a different region of theBytesMutto appear when going through the reclaim optimization.This was encountered in snapview/tungstenite-rs#524 (comment) after #805 was closed, which could have lead to unsound code being merged into
tungstenite.