linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 6/9] rust: device: implement Bound device context

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: <D96CQYSHOQBQ.2NSE5QZNGG0JB@proton.me>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 12:15:08 +0000
From: Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>
To: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>
Cc: bhelgaas@...gle.com, kwilczynski@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, rafael@...nel.org, abdiel.janulgue@...il.com, ojeda@...nel.org, alex.gaynor@...il.com, boqun.feng@...il.com, gary@...yguo.net, bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com, a.hindborg@...nel.org, aliceryhl@...gle.com, tmgross@...ch.edu, daniel.almeida@...labora.com, robin.murphy@....com, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/9] rust: device: implement Bound device context

On Mon Apr 14, 2025 at 1:13 PM CEST, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 10:44:35AM +0000, Benno Lossin wrote:
>> On Sun Apr 13, 2025 at 7:37 PM CEST, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
>> 
>> > +            $device,
>> > +            $crate::device::Bound => $crate::device::Normal
>> 
>> IIUC, all "devices" (so eg `pci::Device`) will use this macro, right? In
>> that case, I think we can document this behavior a bit better, possibly
>> on the `DeviceContext` context trait and/or on the different type
>> states. So on `Core` we could say "The `Core` context is a supercontext
>> of the [`Bound`] context and devices also expose operations available in
>> that context while in `Core`." and similarly on `Bound` with `Normal`.
>
> Fully agree, I absolutely want to have this documented. I wasn't yet sure where
> I want to document this though. device::DeviceContext seems to be a reasonable
> place.
>
> Besides that, I think I also want to rename it to device::Context, not sure if
> it's worth though.

Sounds reasonable to me.

---
Cheers,
Benno