linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] rust: property: Introduce PropertyGuard

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: <aAz1f2jhdwjXmHex@cassiopeiae>
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2025 17:02:23 +0200
From: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>
To: Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@...il.com>
Cc: Remo Senekowitsch <remo@...nzli.dev>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.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>,
	Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@...bosch.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] rust: property: Introduce PropertyGuard

On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 04:35:07PM +0200, Dirk Behme wrote:
> On 26.04.25 16:19, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 01:08:39PM +0200, Remo Senekowitsch wrote:
> >> On Sat Apr 26, 2025 at 12:15 PM CEST, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> >>> If it'd be possible to use dev_err!() instead I wouldn't object in this specific
> >>> case. But this code is used by drivers from probe(), hence printing the error
> >>> without saying for which device it did occur is a bit pointless.
> >>>
> >>> Drivers can still decide to properly print the error if the returned Result
> >>> indicates one.
> >>
> >> One alternative would be to store a reference count to the device in
> >> `FwNode`. At that point we'd be guaranteed to have a valid reference
> >> whenever we want to log something.
> > 
> > Yes, that would work. However, I'm not convinced that it's worth to store an
> > ARef<Device> (i.e. take a device reference) in each FwNode structure *only* to
> > be able to force an error print if a required device property isn't available.
> > 
> > Why do you think it is important to force this error print by having it in
> > PropertyGuard::required() and even take an additional device reference for this
> > purpose, rather than leaving it to the driver when to print a message for an
> > error condition that makes it fail to probe()?
> 
> To my understanding doing the error print in "core" was proposed by
> Rob [1]:

That is fine, though it doesn't answer my question above. :)