[#525] resizable shm support

[elfenpiff]

Notes for Reviewer

Makes the ZeroCopyConnection concept multi segment capable. Instead of using of UsedChunkList, that tracks all outgoing samples to recover them when a subscriber dies, we have now one UsedChunkList per segment.
The user can define how many segments at most the ZeroCopyConnection can manage in parallel. This is useful to avoid the overhead in the case that one has a static type and not the slice case as payload.

Pre-Review Checklist for the PR Author

1. Add sensible notes for the reviewer
2. PR title is short, expressive and meaningful
3. Relevant issues are linked in the References section
4. Every source code file has a copyright header with SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 OR MIT
5. Branch follows the naming format (iox2-123-introduce-posix-ipc-example)
6. Commits messages are according to this guideline
   • Commit messages have the issue ID ([#123] Add posix ipc example)
   • Commit author matches Eclipse Contributor Agreement (and ECA is signed)
7. Tests follow the best practice for testing
8. Changelog updated in the unreleased section including API breaking changes
9. Assign PR to reviewer
10. All checks have passed (except task-list-completed)

Checklist for the PR Reviewer

• Commits are properly organized and messages are according to the guideline
• Unit tests have been written for new behavior
• Public API is documented
• PR title describes the changes

Post-review Checklist for the PR Author

1. All open points are addressed and tracked via issues

References

Closes #525

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 83.93782% with 31 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 79.07%. Comparing base (949d2e0) to head (47b476d).
Report is 16 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
iceoryx2-cal/src/zero_copy_connection/common.rs	85.10%	14 Missing ⚠️
iceoryx2-bb/lock-free/src/spsc/index_queue.rs	69.23%	4 Missing ⚠️
...ck-free/src/spsc/safely_overflowing_index_queue.rs	81.25%	3 Missing ⚠️
iceoryx2-bb/container/src/queue.rs	71.42%	2 Missing ⚠️
iceoryx2-bb/container/src/slotmap.rs	90.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
iceoryx2-bb/container/src/vec.rs	66.66%	2 Missing ⚠️
iceoryx2-bb/lock-free/src/mpmc/container.rs	80.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
iceoryx2-bb/lock-free/src/mpmc/bit_set.rs	75.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
iceoryx2-bb/lock-free/src/mpmc/unique_index_set.rs	75.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #527      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   79.13%   79.07%   -0.07%     
==========================================
  Files         202      202              
  Lines       24815    24887      +72     
==========================================
+ Hits        19638    19680      +42     
- Misses       5177     5207      +30     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...l/src/communication_channel/posix_shared_memory.rs	90.64% <100.00%> (ø)
...yx2-cal/src/communication_channel/process_local.rs	89.31% <100.00%> (ø)
iceoryx2-cal/src/dynamic_storage/mod.rs	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...yx2-cal/src/dynamic_storage/posix_shared_memory.rs	89.07% <100.00%> (-0.22%)	⬇️
iceoryx2-cal/src/shared_memory/mod.rs	100.00% <ø> (ø)
iceoryx2-cal/src/shm_allocator/pointer_offset.rs	79.48% <100.00%> (+6.15%)	⬆️
iceoryx2-cal/src/zero_copy_connection/mod.rs	12.50% <ø> (ø)
iceoryx2/src/port/details/publisher_connections.rs	98.68% <100.00%> (-1.32%)	⬇️
...ceoryx2/src/port/details/subscriber_connections.rs	94.80% <100.00%> (ø)
iceoryx2-bb/lock-free/src/mpmc/bit_set.rs	95.23% <75.00%> (ø)
... and 8 more

... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes

[elBoberido]

Food for thought. Shouldn't this be unsafe?

[elfenpiff]

Why? You just create a PointerOffset nothing can cause undefined behavior or a segfault here.

[elBoberido]

Maybe I was thinking too much of Box::from_raw but since one can create it from any offset + index, it would be moot.