linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 3/8] rust: time: Change output of Ktime's sub operation to Delta

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: <20241023.105855.1516501489443596246.fujita.tomonori@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2024 10:58:55 +0900 (JST)
From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>
To: miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com
Cc: fujita.tomonori@...il.com, aliceryhl@...gle.com,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, andrew@...n.ch,
 hkallweit1@...il.com, tmgross@...ch.edu, ojeda@...nel.org,
 alex.gaynor@...il.com, gary@...yguo.net, bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com,
 benno.lossin@...ton.me, a.hindborg@...sung.com, anna-maria@...utronix.de,
 frederic@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, arnd@...db.de,
 jstultz@...gle.com, sboyd@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 3/8] rust: time: Change output of Ktime's
 sub operation to Delta

On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 18:45:13 +0200
Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com> wrote:

>> Surely, we could create both Delta and Instant. What is Ktime used
>> for? Both can simply use bindings::ktime_t like the followings?
> 
> I think it may help having 2 (public) types, rather than reusing the
> `Ktime` name for one of them, because people may associate several
> concepts to `ktime_t` which is what they know already, but I would
> suggest mentioning in the docs clearly that these maps to usecase
> subsets of `ktime_t` (whether we mention or not that they are
> supposed to be `ktime_t`s is another thing, even if they are).

Sounds good. I'll create both `Delta` and `Instant`.

> Whether we have a third private type internally for `Ktime` or not
> does not matter much, so whatever is best for implementation purposes.
> And if we do have a private `Ktime`, I would avoid making it public
> unless there is a good reason for doing so.

I don't think implementing `Delta` and `Instant` types on the top of a
private Ktime makes sense. I'll just rename the current `Ktime` type to
`Instant` type.