Write only (write combined) memory

I have a chunk of write combined memory (GPU memory - though it doesn't particularly matter where it comes from other then that it is relatively large typically).

Now, because reading from this type of memory is prohibitively expensive I would like to make it impossible to read from this memory in the API that I'm building.

Because IndexMut: Index this isn't as straight forward as I would've liked it to be, what are the typical options used for this kind of scenario?

Note that IndexMut, handing out mutable references, allows reading operations as well, even if IndexMut: Index weren’t the case (you can read the value behind e.g. a &mut u8).


Yeah - that's also a pretty big problem in this case and would be another reason IndexMut wouldn't be possible here.

I wouldn't say there's anything "typical" in this situation. Reading being a lot more expensive than writing is exactly the atypical case. Thus, I don't think there's anything particularly nice or idiomatic you can do with it.

What you can do is not implement IndexMut and Index. Instead, provide a method that takes a range of addresses as a Range<usize> or even only a base address, as well as an Iterator that provides elements by-value (no references), then implement this method so that it only ever writes and never reads.

It's another motivation example for introducing &out references in addition to working with uninitialized memory. Unfortunately they didn't get much traction...

1 Like

This is way harder than it sounds, because Drop normally gets invoked whenever you write one value over the top of another:

let mut d = “first”.to_owned();
d = “second”.to_owned();

This will implicitly invoked the String destructor, so that first doesn’t leak, and this involves reading from “d” before the second one gets written to it.

1 Like

That's a good point, however I suspect that such Rust code isn't going to be able to run on the GPU anyway, and @Jasper-Bekkers only needs to copy over a bunch of non-Drop primitive numbers. (Is that the case?)

Yeah this would only concern POD types, so Drop shouldn't really be running any logic here.

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. We invite you to open a new topic if you have further questions or comments.