linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] rust: add #[export] 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJ-ks9mmDeqaj+G__OkvCcerNvh3WkVDTWfJepNSdrwU7dyRsw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 10:51:00 -0500
From: Tamir Duberstein <tamird@...il.com>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, 
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, 
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>, Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>, 
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, 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>, 
	Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>, Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>, 
	David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] rust: add #[export] macro

On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 10:49 AM Miguel Ojeda
<miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 4:41 PM Tamir Duberstein <tamird@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > This needs an update given Miguel's comments on the cover letter. I
> > wonder if the code should also justify the choice (over cbindgen).
>
> `cbindgen` is a longer term thing and more complex, assuming we use it
> in the end, so I think it is fine going with this for the time being
> -- it is straightforward and a net improvement.
>
> Later on, if needed, we can just make `export` a no-op, right?
>
> It may also be useful to have the exports "explicitly tagged" this way.

Sounds reasonable. I was suggesting that we document the rationale -
not that we change the decision.