linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 0/6] rust: extend `module!` macro with integer parameter support

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: <CANiq72mW94Y-bsJFMHqF8fbXhvAizEn7-NnxawTW+5brbxJHBg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 16:37:43 +0100
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>
Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>, Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...sung.com>, 
	Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...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>, Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, 
	Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>, Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, 
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Adam Bratschi-Kaye <ark.email@...il.com>, 
	linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, Simona Vetter <simona.vetter@...ll.ch>, 
	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, 
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/6] rust: extend `module!` macro with integer
 parameter support

On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 3:55 PM Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com> wrote:
>
> From what I can see in this series, the bindings required adding
> a number of generic functions to the Rust support code and also most
> discussion revolved around that. I'm worried this might be the case also
> for foreseeable future updates, until more building blocks are in place.
> It then makes me think most changes to this code will need to go through
> the Rust tree for now.

Those would normally go through the Rust tree, yeah. Since we don't
have many users yet, and we avoid adding dead code in general, things
are fairly barebones.

If you prefer, we can take the non-module related dependencies through
the Rust tree this cycle, and then you can pick the modules parts in
the next one.

> On the other hand, if the changes are reasonably limited to mostly
> rust/kernel/module_param.rs and rust/macros/module.rs, then yes, I'd say
> it should be ok to take the patches through the modules tree.

Yeah, that should be the case. Worst case, we can do the delay-a-cycle
thing, or if urgent create a small branch, etc.

Cheers,
Miguel