linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V8 06/14] rust: Add bare minimal bindings for clk framework

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: <a66c949345e9118b2ebbdca39e4962c5.sboyd@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:07:49 -0800
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org>, Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>, Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...hat.com>, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, 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>, Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, Manos Pitsidianakis <manos.pitsidianakis@...aro.org>, Erik Schilling <erik.schilling@...aro.org>, Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>, Joakim Bech <joakim.bech@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 06/14] rust: Add bare minimal bindings for clk framework

Quoting Danilo Krummrich (2025-02-06 15:11:31)
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2025 at 12:05:59PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> 
> > as most clk consumer operations bail out early in that case.
> 
> Most? Does that mean NULL isn't *always* valid?

I'm hedging because the common clk framework is just one implementation
of the clk.h API in the kernel. We still have a couple other
implementations (sadly) where I haven't checked to see what they do if a
NULL pointer is passed in. But NULL should always be a valid clk handle
per the clk.h API documentation, so an implementation that fails at that
is broken.