linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/13] [RFC] Rust support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgdhVW3+YFHG5Le=mZMYf3mGjgv1f-Td=254bj9fYd7fg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 14 Apr 2021 13:21:52 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     ojeda@...nel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] [RFC] Rust support

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 1:10 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> There's a philosophical point to be discussed here which you're skating
> right over!  Should rust-in-the-linux-kernel provide the same memory
> allocation APIs as the rust-standard-library, or should it provide a Rusty
> API to the standard-linux-memory-allocation APIs?

Yeah, I think that the standard Rust API may simply not be acceptable
inside the kernel, if it has similar behavior to the (completely
broken) C++ "new" operator.

So anything that does "panic!" in the normal Rust API model needs to
be (statically) caught, and never exposed as an actual call to
"panic()/BUG()" in the kernel.

So "Result<T, E>" is basically the way to go, and if the standard Rust
library alloc() model is based on "panic!" then that kind of model
must simply not be used in the kernel.

             Linus

           Linus