[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aAi6UujKysn14fOv@google.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 10:00:50 +0000
From: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>
To: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>
Cc: Tamir Duberstein <tamird@...il.com>, Andrew Ballance <andrewjballance@...il.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...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>,
Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>, Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] rust: alloc: split `Vec::set_len` into `Vec::{inc,dec}_len`
On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 05:42:24PM +0200, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> On 4/16/25 3:28 PM, Alice Ryhl wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 07, 2025 at 10:52:30AM -0400, Tamir Duberstein wrote:
> > > This series is the product of a discussion[0] on the safety requirements
> > > of `set_len`.
> > >
> > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250315154436.65065-1-dakr@kernel.org/ [0]
> > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250316111644.154602-2-andrewjballance@gmail.com/ [1]
> > > Signed-off-by: Tamir Duberstein <tamird@...il.com>
> >
> > I'm still wondering if the divergence from upstream alloc is worth it...
> > but the code is okay.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>
>
> Does this still apply to patch 1 in v4 [1]?
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/20250416-vec-set-len-v4-1-112b222604cd@gmail.com/
I replied with a new tag.
Alice
Powered by blists - more mailing lists