Creating Reference Cycles and Leaking Memory is Safe - The Rust Programming Language

## Creating Reference Cycles and Leaking Memory is Safe

Rust makes a number of guarantees that we've talked about, for example that we'll never have a null value, and data races will be disallowed at compile time. Rust's memory safety guarantees make it more difficult to create memory that never gets cleaned up, which is known as a memory leak. Rust does not make memory leaks impossible, however, preventing memory leaks is not one of Rust's guarantees. In other words, memory leaks are memory safe.

By using `Rc<T>` and `RefCell<T>`, it is possible to create cycles of references where items refer to each other in a cycle. This is bad because the reference count of each item in the cycle will never reach 0, and the values will never be dropped. Let's take a look at how that might happen and how to prevent it.

In Listing 15-16, we're going to use another variation of the `List` definition from Listing 15-5. We're going back to storing an `i32` value as the first element in the `Cons` variant. The second element in the `Cons` variant is now `RefCell<Rc<List>>`: instead of being able to modify the `i32` value this time, we want to be able to modify which `List` a `Cons` variant is pointing to. We've also added a `tail` method to make it convenient for us to access the second item, if we have a `Cons` variant:

Filename: src/main.rs

    #[derive(Debug)]
    enum List {
        Cons(i32, RefCell<Rc<List>>),
        Nil,
    }

    impl List {
        fn tail(&self) -> Option<&RefCell<Rc<List>>> {
            match *self {
                Cons(_, ref item) => Some(item),
                Nil => None,
            }
        }
    }

Listing 15-16: A cons list definition that holds a `RefCell` so that we can modify what a `Cons` variant is referring to

Next, in Listing 15-17, we're going to create a `List` value in the variable `a` that initially is a list of `5, Nil`. Then we'll create a `List` value in the variable `b` that is a list of the value 10 and then points to the list in `a`. Finally, we'll modify `a` so that it points to `b` instead of `Nil`, which will then create a cycle:

Filename: src/main.rs

    # #[derive(Debug)]
    # enum List {
    #     Cons(i32, RefCell<Rc<List>>),
    #     Nil,
    # }
    #
    # impl List {
    #     fn tail(&self) -> Option<&RefCell<Rc<List>>> {
    #         match *self {
    #             Cons(_, ref item) => Some(item),
    #             Nil => None,
    #         }
    #     }
    # }
    #
    use List::{Cons, Nil};
    use std::rc::Rc;
    use std::cell::RefCell;

    fn main() {

        let a = Rc::new(Cons(5, RefCell::new(Rc::new(Nil))));

        println!("a initial rc count = {}", Rc::strong_count(&a));
        println!("a next item = {:?}", a.tail());

        let b = Rc::new(Cons(10, RefCell::new(a.clone())));

        println!("a rc count after b creation = {}", Rc::strong_count(&a));
        println!("b initial rc count = {}", Rc::strong_count(&b));
        println!("b next item = {:?}", b.tail());

        if let Some(ref link) = a.tail() {
            *link.borrow_mut() = b.clone();
        }

        println!("b rc count after changing a = {}", Rc::strong_count(&b));
        println!("a rc count after changing a = {}", Rc::strong_count(&a));

        // Uncomment the next line to see that we have a cycle; it will
        // overflow the stack
        // println!("a next item = {:?}", a.tail());
    }

Listing 15-17: Creating a reference cycle of two `List` values pointing to each other

We use the `tail` method to get a reference to the `RefCell` in `a`, which we put in the variable `link`. Then we use the `borrow_mut` method on the `RefCell` to change the value inside from an `Rc` that holds a `Nil` value to the `Rc` in `b`. We've created a reference cycle that looks like Figure 15-18:

Figure 15-18: A reference cycle of lists `a` and `b` pointing to each other

If you uncomment the last `println!`, Rust will try and print this cycle out with `a` pointing to `b` pointing to `a` and so forth until it overflows the stack.

Looking at the results of the `println!` calls before the last one, we'll see that the reference count of both `a` and `b` are 2 after we change `a` to point to `b`. At the end of `main`, Rust will try and drop `b` first, which will decrease the count of the `Rc` by one. However, because `a` is still referencing that `Rc`, its count is 1 rather than 0, so the memory the `Rc` has on the heap won't be dropped. It'll just sit there with a count of one, forever. In this specific case, the program ends right away, so it's not a problem, but in a more complex program that allocates lots of memory in a cycle and holds onto it for a long time, this would be a problem. The program would be using more memory than it needs to be, and might overwhelm the system and cause it to run out of memory available to use.

Now, as you can see, creating reference cycles is difficult and inconvenient in Rust. But it's not impossible: preventing memory leaks in the form of reference cycles is not one of the guarantees Rust makes. If you have `RefCell<T>` values that contain `Rc<T>` values or similar nested combinations of types with interior mutability and reference counting, be aware that you'll have to ensure that you don't create cycles. In the example in Listing 15-14, the solution would probably be to not write code that could create cycles like this, since we do want `Cons` variants to own the list they point to.

With data structures like graphs, it's sometimes necessary to have references that create cycles in order to have parent nodes point to their children and children nodes point back in the opposite direction to their parents, for example. If one of the directions is expressing ownership and the other isn't, one way of being able to model the relationship of the data without creating reference cycles and memory leaks is using `Weak<T>`. Let's explore that next!

### Prevent Reference Cycles: Turn an `Rc<T>` into a `Weak<T>`

The Rust standard library provides `Weak<T>`, a smart pointer type for use in situations that have cycles of references but only one direction expresses ownership. We've been showing how cloning an `Rc<T>` increases the `strong_count` of references; `Weak<T>` is a way to reference an `Rc<T>` that does not increment the `strong_count`: instead it increments the `weak_count` of references to an `Rc`. When an `Rc` goes out of scope, the inner value will get dropped if the `strong_count` is 0, even if the `weak_count` is not 0. To be able to get the value from a `Weak<T>`, we first have to upgrade it to an `Option<Rc<T>>` by using the `upgrade` method. The result of upgrading a `Weak<T>` will be `Some` if the `Rc` value has not been dropped yet, and `None` if the `Rc` value has been dropped. Because `upgrade` returns an `Option`, we know Rust will make sure we handle both the `Some` case and the `None` case and we won't be trying to use an invalid pointer.

Instead of the list in Listing 15-17 where each item knows only about the next item, let's say we want a tree where the items know about their children items and their parent items.

Let's start just with a struct named `Node` that holds its own `i32` value as well as references to its children `Node` values:

Filename: src/main.rs

    # #![allow(unused_variables)]
    #fn main() {
    use std::rc::Rc;
    use std::cell::RefCell;

    #[derive(Debug)]
    struct Node {
        value: i32,
        children: RefCell<Vec<Rc<Node>>>,
    }

    #}

We want to be able to have a `Node` own its children, and we also want to be able to have variables own each node so we can access them directly. That's why the items in the `Vec` are `Rc<Node>` values. We want to be able to modify what nodes are another node's children, so that's why we have a `RefCell` in `children` around the `Vec`. In Listing 15-19, let's create one instance of `Node` named `leaf` with the value 3 and no children, and another instance named `branch` with the value 5 and `leaf` as one of its children:

Filename: src/main.rs

    fn main() {
        let leaf = Rc::new(Node {
            value: 3,
            children: RefCell::new(vec![]),
        });

        let branch = Rc::new(Node {
            value: 5,
            children: RefCell::new(vec![leaf.clone()]),
        });
    }

Listing 15-19: Creating a `leaf` node and a `branch` node where `branch` has `leaf` as one of its children but `leaf` has no reference to `branch`

The `Node` in `leaf` now has two owners: `leaf` and `branch`, since we clone the `Rc` in `leaf` and store that in `branch`. The `Node` in `branch` knows it's related to `leaf` since `branch` has a reference to `leaf` in `branch.children`. However, `leaf` doesn't know that it's related to `branch`, and we'd like `leaf` to know that `branch` is its parent.

To do that, we're going to add a `parent` field to our `Node` struct definition, but what should the type of `parent` be? We know it can't contain an `Rc<T>`, since `leaf.parent` would point to `branch` and `branch.children` contains a pointer to `leaf`, which makes a reference cycle. Neither `leaf` nor `branch` would get dropped since they would always refer to each other and their reference counts would never be zero.

So instead of `Rc`, we're going to make the type of `parent` use `Weak<T>`, specifically a `RefCell<Weak<Node>>`:

Filename: src/main.rs

    # #![allow(unused_variables)]
    #fn main() {
    use std::rc::{Rc, Weak};
    use std::cell::RefCell;

    #[derive(Debug)]
    struct Node {
        value: i32,
        parent: RefCell<Weak<Node>>,
        children: RefCell<Vec<Rc<Node>>>,
    }

    #}

This way, a node will be able to refer to its parent node if it has one, but it does not own its parent. A parent node will be dropped even if it has child nodes referring to it, as long as it doesn't have a parent node as well. Now let's update `main` to look like Listing 15-20:

Filename: src/main.rs

    fn main() {
        let leaf = Rc::new(Node {
            value: 3,
            parent: RefCell::new(Weak::new()),
            children: RefCell::new(vec![]),
        });

        println!("leaf parent = {:?}", leaf.parent.borrow().upgrade());

        let branch = Rc::new(Node {
            value: 5,
            parent: RefCell::new(Weak::new()),
            children: RefCell::new(vec![leaf.clone()]),
        });

        *leaf.parent.borrow_mut() = Rc::downgrade(&branch);

        println!("leaf parent = {:?}", leaf.parent.borrow().upgrade());
    }

Listing 15-20: A `leaf` node and a `branch` node where `leaf` has a `Weak` reference to its parent, `branch`

Creating the `leaf` node looks similar; since it starts out without a parent, we create a new `Weak` reference instance. When we try to get a reference to the parent of `leaf` by using the `upgrade` method, we'll get a `None` value, as shown by the first `println!` that outputs:

    leaf parent = None

Similarly, `branch` will also have a new `Weak` reference, since `branch` does not have a parent node. We still make `leaf` be one of the children of `branch`. Once we have a new `Node` instance in `branch`, we can modify `leaf` to have a `Weak` reference to `branch` for its parent. We use the `borrow_mut` method on the `RefCell` in the `parent` field of `leaf`, then we use the `Rc::downgrade` function to create a `Weak` reference to `branch` from the `Rc` in `branch.`

When we print out the parent of `leaf` again, this time we'll get a `Some` variant holding `branch`. Also notice we don't get a cycle printed out that eventually ends in a stack overflow like we did in Listing 15-14: the `Weak` references are just printed as `(Weak)`:

    leaf parent = Some(Node { value: 5, parent: RefCell { value: (Weak) },
    children: RefCell { value: [Node { value: 3, parent: RefCell { value: (Weak) },
    children: RefCell { value: [] } }] } })

The fact that we don't get infinite output (or at least until the stack overflows) is one way we can see that we don't have a reference cycle in this case. Another way we can tell is by looking at the values we get from calling `Rc::strong_count` and `Rc::weak_count`. In Listing 15-21, let's create a new inner scope and move the creation of `branch` in there, so that we can see what happens when `branch` is created and then dropped when it goes out of scope:

Filename: src/main.rs

    fn main() {
        let leaf = Rc::new(Node {
            value: 3,
            parent: RefCell::new(Weak::new()),
            children: RefCell::new(vec![]),
        });

        println!(
            "leaf strong = {}, weak = {}",
            Rc::strong_count(&leaf),
            Rc::weak_count(&leaf),
        );

        {
            let branch = Rc::new(Node {
                value: 5,
                parent: RefCell::new(Weak::new()),
                children: RefCell::new(vec![leaf.clone()]),
            });
            *leaf.parent.borrow_mut() = Rc::downgrade(&branch);

            println!(
                "branch strong = {}, weak = {}",
                Rc::strong_count(&branch),
                Rc::weak_count(&branch),
            );

            println!(
                "leaf strong = {}, weak = {}",
                Rc::strong_count(&leaf),
                Rc::weak_count(&leaf),
            );
        }

        println!("leaf parent = {:?}", leaf.parent.borrow().upgrade());
        println!(
            "leaf strong = {}, weak = {}",
            Rc::strong_count(&leaf),
            Rc::weak_count(&leaf),
        );
    }

Listing 15-21: Creating `branch` in an inner scope and examining strong and weak reference counts of `leaf` and `branch`

Right after creating `leaf`, its strong count is 1 (for `leaf` itself) and its weak count is 0. In the inner scope, after we create `branch` and associate `leaf` and `branch`, `branch` will have a strong count of 1 (for `branch` itself) and a weak count of 1 (for `leaf.parent` pointing to `branch` with a `Weak<T>`). `leaf` will have a strong count of 2, since `branch` now has a clone the `Rc` of `leaf` stored in `branch.children`. `leaf` still has a weak count of 0.

When the inner scope ends, `branch` goes out of scope, and its strong count decreases to 0, so its `Node` gets dropped. The weak count of 1 from `leaf.parent` has no bearing on whether `Node` gets dropped or not, so we don't have a memory leak!

If we try to access the parent of `leaf` after the end of the scope, we'll get `None` again like we did before `leaf` had a parent. At the end of the program, `leaf` has a strong count of 1 and a weak count of 0, since `leaf` is now the only thing pointing to it again.

All of the logic managing the counts and whether a value should be dropped or not was managed by `Rc` and `Weak` and their implementations of the `Drop` trait. By specifying that the relationship from a child to its parent should be a `Weak<T>` reference in the definition of `Node`, we're able to have parent nodes point to child nodes and vice versa without creating a reference cycle and memory leaks.

## Summary

We've now covered how you can use different kinds of smart pointers to choose different guarantees and tradeoffs than those Rust makes with regular references. `Box<T>` has a known size and points to data allocated on the heap. `Rc<T>` keeps track of the number of references to data on the heap so that data can have multiple owners. `RefCell<T>` with its interior mutability gives us a type that can be used where we need an immutable type, and enforces the borrowing rules at runtime instead of at compile time.

We've also discussed the `Deref` and `Drop` traits that enable a lot of smart pointers' functionality. We explored how it's possible to create a reference cycle that would cause a memory leak, and how to prevent reference cycles by using `Weak<T>`.

If this chapter has piqued your interest and you now want to implement your own smart pointers, check out The Nomicon for even more useful information.

Next, let's talk about concurrency in Rust. We'll even learn about a few new smart pointers that can help us with it.