linux-kernel - Re: Rust kernel policy

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: <CAMuHMdWNQfmNgMBkkMezeUt573fczzyf7FhXKEo7621xuhWC4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 14:25:59 +0100
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, 
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>, 
	rust-for-linux <rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ksummit@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: Rust kernel policy

Hi Jarkko,

On Wed, 19 Feb 2025 at 12:39, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2025-02-19 at 16:35 +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
> > On Wed, 19 Feb 2025 at 16:20, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
> > wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2025-02-18 at 13:22 -0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > > > FWIW, usually Rust code has doc tests allowing you to run it with
> > > > kunit,
> > > > see:
> > > >
> > > >       https://docs.kernel.org/rust/testing.html
> > >
> > > I know this document and this was what I used to compile DMA
> > > patches.
> > > Then I ended up into "no test, no go" state :-)
> > >
> > > I put this is way. If that is enough, or perhaps combined with
> > > submitting-patches.rst, why this email thread exists?
> >
> > There is users for the DMA stuff (now there should be some more
> > tests), the problem is posting the users involves all the precursor
> > patches for a bunch of other subsystems,
> >
> > There's no nice way to get this all bootstrapped, two methods are:
> >
> > a) posting complete series crossing subsystems, people get pissed off
> > and won't review because it's too much
> > b) posting series for review that don't have a full user in the
> > series, people get pissed off because of lack of users.
> >
> > We are mostly moving forward with (b) initially, this gets rust folks
> > to give reviews and point out any badly thought out rust code, and
> > give others some ideas for what the code looks like and that it
> > exists
> > so others don't reinvent the wheel.
> >
> > Maybe we can add more rust tests to that particular patch series? but
> > this is the wrong thread to discuss it, so maybe ask on that thread
> > rather on this generic thread.
>
> Here's one way to do it:
>
> 1. Send the patch set as it is.

You mean the series from b) above, right?
(To be repeated for each subsystem for which you have such a series).

> 2. Point out to Git tree with branch containing the patches + patches
>    for e.g. driver (hopefully for something that QEMU is able to emulate)
>    and other stuff/shenanigans that allows to test them.

Exactly.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds