linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 9/9] rust: file: add abstraction for `poll

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: <50317af4-9f3c-4f72-bd8e-4e39fb4e108f@proton.me>
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2024 09:33:59 +0000
From: Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>
To: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>, Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>, Todd Kjos <tkjos@...roid.com>, Martijn Coenen <maco@...roid.com>, Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>, Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@...gle.com>, Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 9/9] rust: file: add abstraction for `poll_table`

On 29.01.24 18:08, Alice Ryhl wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 11:11 AM Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me> wrote:
>>
>> On 18.01.24 15:36, Alice Ryhl wrote:
>>> +/// Wraps the kernel's `struct poll_table`.
>>> +///
>>> +/// # Invariants
>>> +///
>>> +/// This struct contains a valid `struct poll_table`.
>>> +///
>>> +/// For a `struct poll_table` to be valid, its `_qproc` function must follow the safety
>>> +/// requirements of `_qproc` functions. It must ensure that when the waiter is removed and a rcu
>>
>> The first sentence sounds a bit weird, what is meant by `_qproc` functions?
>> Do you have a link to where that is defined? Or is the whole definition the
>> next sentence?
> 
> Yeah. Does this wording work better for you?
> 
> /// For a `struct poll_table` to be valid, its `_qproc` function must
> follow the safety
> /// requirements of `_qproc` functions:
> ///
> /// * The `_qproc` function is given permission to enqueue a waiter to

Does it make sense to change "waiter" to `wait_queue_head`?

> the provided `poll_table`
> ///   during the call. Once the waiter is removed and an rcu grace
> period has passed, it must no
> ///   longer access the `wait_queue_head`.

Yes that is better.

-- 
Cheers,
Benno