linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/Kconfig: make CFI_AUTO

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: <CAH5fLgjm+Fru+VOjpbq+DJD=xeRreeKocv9C9WO9sGWBX0cpmQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:02:39 +0200
From: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>, Paweł Anikiel <panikiel@...gle.com>, 
	Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, 
	Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, 
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, 
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>, Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, 
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, 
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, Matthew Maurer <mmaurer@...gle.com>, 
	Ramon de C Valle <rcvalle@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/Kconfig: make CFI_AUTO_DEFAULT depend on !RUST

On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 4:08 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 03:59:53PM +0200, Alice Ryhl wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 3:34 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 03:27:55PM +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 3:26 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > New compiler can't build old core?
> > > >
> > > > No, that is not intended to work -- `core` is tied to the compiler.
> > >
> > > OMFG, you just gave me another reason to hate on this rust-bucket of a
> > > language :-/ What language can't even build an old version of its own
> > > runtime :-(
> >
> > I don't think there's anything unreasonable about having a place to
> > put logic that depends on compiler internals.
>
> Having compiler internals exposed to such an extend that programs can
> make use of them _is_ weird. It creates the whole problem of where to
> put it.
>
> C++ doesn't have anything like this afaik. Esp. if you disable rtti and
> exception muck, you get a very minimal runtime. And even if you don't,
> it certainly doesn't break every 6 weeks. ABIs and all that.
>
> Maybe I've been living in C/C++ land for too long, but you either expose
> a full language feature and then everybody can use it, runtime,
> libraries and user code alike, or you don't.

Well, I would say that Rust has just decided to expose such language
features in a different way from how C/C++ exposes them. Core is *how*
rust exposes the features. There are quite a few language features
that are exposed via a type or method in core that you use like any
other type or method. I think it works relatively well because you can
expose new features by adding things to core, which means that you
don't need any new syntax for the feature. It's just ordinary method
calls into code that you could not implement yourself.

Alice