linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] rust: init: remove impl Zeroable for Infallible

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <37A7EC35-7889-4378-A30C-126B1AD668C8@me.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2024 10:55:49 -0700
From: Laine Taffin Altman <alexanderaltman@...com>
To: Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
 Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
 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>,
 Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
 Martin Rodriguez Reboredo <yakoyoku@...il.com>,
 lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] rust: init: remove impl Zeroable for Infallible

On Apr 7, 2024, at 1:56 AM, Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me> wrote:
> On 04.04.24 19:28, Laine Taffin Altman wrote:
>>> On Apr 4, 2024, at 4:03 AM, Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 11:01 AM Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I don't see this commit in the kernel tree, what did you specify as
>>>> `--base` when running `git format`?
>>> 
>>> Yeah, I don't have it either, but it seems to apply cleanly.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Miguel
>> 
>> I ran `git format-patch origin/master --base=origin/master`.  I
>> can’t imagine how that could have resulted in a nonexistent commit
>> hash?
> 
> That heavily depends on what `origin/master` is. Is `origin` pointing to
> Torvald's git? In that case it would explain why we don't have that
> commit hash yet.
> Normally you should base your work on the tree listed in the `T:` entry
> of the subsystem in the MAINTAINERS file. In our case it is `rust-next`.
> But no worries, since it applies cleanly it should be fine for this
> patch. Just something to keep in mind if you submit any future patches.
> 
> --
> Cheers,
> Benno

Ah, that makes sense!  Indeed it was pointing there.  I’ll remember for next time!

Thanks,
Laine