linux-kernel - Re: C aggregate passing (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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <9610C397-39C8-479B-A727-1091BB8548C9@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 07:42:19 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Ventura Jack <venturajack85@...il.com>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
CC: airlied@...il.com, boqun.feng@...il.com, david.laight.linux@...il.com,
        ej@...i.de, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, hch@...radead.org,
        ksummit@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: C aggregate passing (Rust kernel policy)

On February 22, 2025 2:03:48 AM PST, Ventura Jack <venturajack85@...il.com> wrote:
>>Gcc used to initialize it all, but as of gcc-15 it apparently says
>>"Oh, the standard allows this crazy behavior, so we'll do it by
>default".
>>
>>Yeah. People love to talk about "safe C", but compiler people have
>>actively tried to make C unsafer for decades. The C standards
>>committee has been complicit. I've ranted about the crazy C alias
>>rules before.
>
>Unsafe Rust actually has way stricter rules for aliasing than C. For you
>and others who don't like C's aliasing, it may be best to avoid unsafe Rust.

From what I was reading in this tree, Rust doesn't actually have any rules at all?!