1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
|
{-# LANGUAGE Unsafe #-}
{-# LANGUAGE NoImplicitPrelude
, MagicHash
, UnboxedTuples
#-}
{-# OPTIONS_HADDOCK not-home #-}
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- |
-- Module : GHC.IO.Unsafe
-- Copyright : (c) The University of Glasgow 1994-2002
-- License : see libraries/base/LICENSE
--
-- Maintainer : cvs-ghc@haskell.org
-- Stability : internal
-- Portability : non-portable (GHC Extensions)
--
-- Unsafe IO operations
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
module GHC.IO.Unsafe (
unsafePerformIO, unsafeInterleaveIO,
unsafeDupablePerformIO, unsafeDupableInterleaveIO,
noDuplicate,
) where
import GHC.Base
{- Note [unsafePerformIO and strictness]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Consider this sub-expression (from tests/lib/should_run/memo002)
unsafePerformIO (do { lockMemoTable
; let r = f x
; updateMemoTable x r
; unlockMemoTable
; return r })
It's super-important that the `let r = f x` is lazy. If the demand
analyser sees that `r` is sure to be demanded, it'll use call-by-value
for (f x), that will try to lock the already-locked table => deadlock.
See #19181.
Now `r` doesn't look strict, because it's wrapped in a `return`.
But if we were to define unsafePerformIO like this
unsafePerformIO (IO m) = case runRW# m of (# _, r #) -> r
then we'll push that `case` inside the arugment to runRW#, givign
runRW# (\s -> case lockMemoTable s of s1 ->
let r = f x in
case updateMemoTable s1 of s2 ->
case unlockMemoTable s2 of _ ->
r)
And now that `let` really does look strict. No good!
Solution: wrap the result of the unsafePerformIO in 'lazy', to conceal
it from the demand analyser:
unsafePerformIO (IO m) = case runRW# m of (# _, r #) -> lazy r
------> ^^^^
See also Note [lazyId magic] in GHC.Types.Id.Make
-}
{-|
This is the \"back door\" into the 'IO' monad, allowing
'IO' computation to be performed at any time. For
this to be safe, the 'IO' computation should be
free of side effects and independent of its environment.
If the I\/O computation wrapped in 'unsafePerformIO' performs side
effects, then the relative order in which those side effects take
place (relative to the main I\/O trunk, or other calls to
'unsafePerformIO') is indeterminate. Furthermore, when using
'unsafePerformIO' to cause side-effects, you should take the following
precautions to ensure the side effects are performed as many times as
you expect them to be. Note that these precautions are necessary for
GHC, but may not be sufficient, and other compilers may require
different precautions:
* Use @{\-\# NOINLINE foo \#-\}@ as a pragma on any function @foo@
that calls 'unsafePerformIO'. If the call is inlined,
the I\/O may be performed more than once.
* Use the compiler flag @-fno-cse@ to prevent common sub-expression
elimination being performed on the module, which might combine
two side effects that were meant to be separate. A good example
is using multiple global variables (like @test@ in the example below).
* Make sure that the either you switch off let-floating (@-fno-full-laziness@), or that the
call to 'unsafePerformIO' cannot float outside a lambda. For example,
if you say:
@
f x = unsafePerformIO (newIORef [])
@
you may get only one reference cell shared between all calls to @f@.
Better would be
@
f x = unsafePerformIO (newIORef [x])
@
because now it can't float outside the lambda.
It is less well known that
'unsafePerformIO' is not type safe. For example:
> test :: IORef [a]
> test = unsafePerformIO $ newIORef []
>
> main = do
> writeIORef test [42]
> bang <- readIORef test
> print (bang :: [Char])
This program will core dump. This problem with polymorphic references
is well known in the ML community, and does not arise with normal
monadic use of references. There is no easy way to make it impossible
once you use 'unsafePerformIO'. Indeed, it is
possible to write @coerce :: a -> b@ with the
help of 'unsafePerformIO'. So be careful!
-}
unsafePerformIO :: IO a -> a
unsafePerformIO m = unsafeDupablePerformIO (noDuplicate >> m)
{-|
This version of 'unsafePerformIO' is more efficient
because it omits the check that the IO is only being performed by a
single thread. Hence, when you use 'unsafeDupablePerformIO',
there is a possibility that the IO action may be performed multiple
times (on a multiprocessor), and you should therefore ensure that
it gives the same results each time. It may even happen that one
of the duplicated IO actions is only run partially, and then interrupted
in the middle without an exception being raised. Therefore, functions
like 'Control.Exception.bracket' cannot be used safely within
'unsafeDupablePerformIO'.
@since 4.4.0.0
-}
unsafeDupablePerformIO :: IO a -> a
-- See Note [unsafePerformIO and strictness]
unsafeDupablePerformIO (IO m) = case runRW# m of (# _, a #) -> lazy a
{-|
'unsafeInterleaveIO' allows an 'IO' computation to be deferred lazily.
When passed a value of type @IO a@, the 'IO' will only be performed
when the value of the @a@ is demanded. This is used to implement lazy
file reading, see 'System.IO.hGetContents'.
-}
{-# INLINE unsafeInterleaveIO #-}
unsafeInterleaveIO :: IO a -> IO a
unsafeInterleaveIO m = unsafeDupableInterleaveIO (noDuplicate >> m)
-- Note [unsafeDupableInterleaveIO should not be inlined]
-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--
-- We used to believe that INLINE on unsafeInterleaveIO was safe,
-- because the state from this IO thread is passed explicitly to the
-- interleaved IO, so it cannot be floated out and shared.
--
-- HOWEVER, if the compiler figures out that r is used strictly here,
-- then it will eliminate the thunk and the side effects in m will no
-- longer be shared in the way the programmer was probably expecting,
-- but can be performed many times. In #5943, this broke our
-- definition of fixIO, which contains
--
-- ans <- unsafeInterleaveIO (takeMVar m)
--
-- after inlining, we lose the sharing of the takeMVar, so the second
-- time 'ans' was demanded we got a deadlock. We could fix this with
-- a readMVar, but it seems wrong for unsafeInterleaveIO to sometimes
-- share and sometimes not (plus it probably breaks the noDuplicate).
-- So now, we do not inline unsafeDupableInterleaveIO.
{-|
'unsafeDupableInterleaveIO' allows an 'IO' computation to be deferred lazily.
When passed a value of type @IO a@, the 'IO' will only be performed
when the value of the @a@ is demanded.
The computation may be performed multiple times by different threads,
possibly at the same time. To ensure that the computation is performed
only once, use 'unsafeInterleaveIO' instead.
-}
{-# NOINLINE unsafeDupableInterleaveIO #-}
-- See Note [unsafeDupableInterleaveIO should not be inlined]
unsafeDupableInterleaveIO :: IO a -> IO a
unsafeDupableInterleaveIO (IO m)
= IO ( \ s -> let
r = case m s of (# _, res #) -> res
in
(# s, r #))
{-|
Ensures that the suspensions under evaluation by the current thread
are unique; that is, the current thread is not evaluating anything
that is also under evaluation by another thread that has also executed
'noDuplicate'.
This operation is used in the definition of 'unsafePerformIO' to
prevent the IO action from being executed multiple times, which is usually
undesirable.
-}
noDuplicate :: IO ()
noDuplicate = IO $ \s -> case noDuplicate# s of s' -> (# s', () #)
|
