linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 0/2] RISC-V: enable rust

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]

Date:   Fri, 24 Feb 2023 23:38:28 +0100
From:   Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
Cc:     Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>,
        ojeda@...nel.org, alex.gaynor@...il.com, wedsonaf@...il.com,
        boqun.feng@...il.com, gary@...yguo.net, bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com,
        corbet@....net, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        nathan@...nel.org, ndesaulniers@...gle.com, trix@...hat.com,
        rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/2] RISC-V: enable rust

On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 10:32 PM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com> wrote:
>
> I'm fine with it, but IIRC the Rust support for most targets was pulled
> out as they weren't deemed ready to go yet.  If the Rust folks are OK

So we trimmed the original series from v8 to v9 as much as possible in
order to upstream things piece by piece, get maintainers involved, and
so on; i.e. they were not trimmed because they were not ready.

Having said that, for the architectures support in particular, what we
had is indeed a prototype: each architecture we added was able to
compile, boot into QEMU, load the sample Rust modules, pass a few
tests, and so on in our CI, using a couple kernel configs. But that is
just the basic support, and it does not mean it works for other kernel
configs, all hardware, all security features, and so on.

So it depends on how you want to approach it, whether you are
interested in the basic support or not, etc. In any case, I would
recommend having an expert on the architecture take a look to
double-check things look sane, run some tests on real hardware, etc.

> turning on RISC-V support then it's fine with me, but I think it's
> really more up to them at this point.
>
> So
>
> Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...osinc.com>
>
> in case folks want to take it via some Rust-related tree, but I'm also
> fine taking it via the RISC-V tree if that's easier.

Thanks Palmer! We are trying to get maintainers of the different
subsystems/archs/... involved so that they maintain the different Rust
bits we are upstreaming, so ideally it would go through the RISC-V
tree.

Cheers,
Miguel