linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] rust: time: add Ktime

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, 22 Mar 2024 10:18:02 +0000
From: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>
To: benno.lossin@...ton.me
Cc: a.hindborg@...sung.com, alex.gaynor@...il.com, aliceryhl@...gle.com, 
	bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com, boqun.feng@...il.com, gary@...yguo.net, 
	jstultz@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ojeda@...nel.org, 
	rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, sboyd@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, 
	wedsonaf@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rust: time: add Ktime

Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me> wrote:
> On 3/22/24 09:59, Alice Ryhl wrote:
>> +/// Returns the number of milliseconds between two ktimes.
>> +#[inline]
>> +pub fn ktime_ms_delta(later: Ktime, earlier: Ktime) -> i64 {
>> +    (later - earlier).to_ms()
>> +}
> 
> Is there a reason for this function being standalone?

I think for a Rust time API, we should make one of two choices:

* Match the C ktime_t API as closely as possible.
* Match the Rust standard library std::time API as closely as possible.

This patchset has made the former choice, and that is why I went with
this design.

In the future it could make sense to add a more "Rusty" API, but even
then I think it could make sense to have both and implement the latter
in terms of the former. That way, only the API that closely matches the
C ktime_t API needs to concern itself with unsafely calling into C.

Alice