Rollup merge of #82892 - jix:clarify-read-read, r=joshtriplett

Clarify docs for Read::read's return value

Right now the docs for `Read::read`'s return value are phrased in a way that makes it easy for the reader to assume that the return value is never larger than the passed buffer. This PR clarifies that this is a requirement for implementations of the trait, but that callers have to expect a buggy yet safe implementation failing to do so, especially if unchecked accesses to the buffer are done afterwards.

I fell into this trap recently, and when I noticed, I looked at the docs again and had the feeling that I might not have been the first one to miss this.

The same issue of trusting the return value of `read` was also present in std itself for about 2.5 years and only fixed recently, see #80895.

I hope that clarifying the docs might help others to avoid this issue.

1 files changed, 7 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/library/std/src/io/mod.rs b/library/std/src/io/mod.rs
index 17002e3b860..6abb300054a 100644
--- a/library/std/src/io/mod.rs
+++ b/library/std/src/io/mod.rs
@@ -514,8 +514,8 @@ pub trait Read {
     /// waiting for data, but if an object needs to block for a read and cannot,
     /// it will typically signal this via an [`Err`] return value.
     ///
-    /// If the return value of this method is [`Ok(n)`], then it must be
-    /// guaranteed that `0 <= n <= buf.len()`. A nonzero `n` value indicates
+    /// If the return value of this method is [`Ok(n)`], then implementations must
+    /// guarantee that `0 <= n <= buf.len()`. A nonzero `n` value indicates
     /// that the buffer `buf` has been filled in with `n` bytes of data from this
     /// source. If `n` is `0`, then it can indicate one of two scenarios:
     ///
@@ -529,6 +529,11 @@ pub trait Read {
     /// This may happen for example because fewer bytes are actually available right now
     /// (e. g. being close to end-of-file) or because read() was interrupted by a signal.
     ///
+    /// As this trait is safe to implement, callers cannot rely on `n <= buf.len()` for safety.
+    /// Extra care needs to be taken when `unsafe` functions are used to access the read bytes.
+    /// Callers have to ensure that no unchecked out-of-bounds accesses are possible even if
+    /// `n > buf.len()`.
+    ///
     /// No guarantees are provided about the contents of `buf` when this
     /// function is called, implementations cannot rely on any property of the
     /// contents of `buf` being true. It is recommended that *implementations*