linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC WIP] bitflag_options macro

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: <6oVxMKpDaaUC17bi8K0ukcOwrwjvJ2_4c8LenjG7xMSJLSkAXWdU6VlCxpT8Ek1TA7veX_AShL_DRZIv2eGv66PSWTCz0S88o9gZprU0ooo=@protonmail.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2025 20:51:48 +0000
From: Timothy Garwood <gtimothy-dev@...tonmail.com>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc: Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>, Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>, Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC WIP] bitflag_options macro_rules implementation

Hi Miguel,

> The kernel requires a "known identity" for signatures. For instance,
> the name you use to sign documents in real life.

Will do. I value anonymity, but its not hard to figure out who I am with the
info I have already given, so not really anonymous :) I'll update my name.

> The docs/examples you wrote are very nice, but typically you also want
> to showcase an actual use case within the kernel. You can do that, for
> instance, in a separate patch that does it for hrtimer or something
> else (even if it may not be intended for merge).
>
> This can also allow reviewers and potential users to give suggestions
> and to guide the design.

Ok, I already have hrtimer somewhere (or I'll remake it quickly), I'll make
another patch. which will depend on this one.

> > + /// The bitfield type, usually [u8] or [u32]
>
>
> There are some nits with formatting which are non-important at this
> stage, but please try to follow a consistent style with other files.
> For instance, we try to use intra-doc links and code spans where
> possible, avoid double blank lines, etc.

Ok. I will check the other files and be extra attentive inside any macro since
the formatter usually doesn't work there.

> I also noticed a couple typos -- I usually recommend using at least
> `--codespell` in `scripts/checkpatch.pl`.

Will do. Just fixed my codespell (did not find the dictionary), I see I indeed
misspelled a few things.

> For macros, it can be a good idea to showcase how the generated code
> for a simple case would look like. It is painful sometimes to maintain
> that over time, but it can really help others understand what the
> macro does from another perspective.
>
> This one can also help reviewers and to guide the design, similar to
> the doc suggestion above.

Makes sense. I will expand the macro in the example.

> Cheers,
> Miguel

Thank you for your feedback,
Timothy