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: <32b5e40d-f1a1-4104-b4e4-1471de77e2d8@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2025 13:25:03 -0700
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: Remo Senekowitsch <remo@...nzli.dev>, Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>,
 Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@...il.com>, 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 4/28/25 1:18 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 27, 2025 at 03:12:18PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
>> On 4/26/25 2:50 PM, Remo Senekowitsch wrote:
>>> On Sat Apr 26, 2025 at 5:02 PM CEST, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
>>>> 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:
>> ...
>> The idea is that the lower level you are in the software stack, the
>> more rare printing should be.
> 
> If that's a kernel style/requirement, I've never heard that. About the 
> only coding style in this area I'm aware of don't print messages on 
> kmalloc failure because the core does. It's the same concept here.
> 
> When practically every caller is printing a message, it should go in the 

If *every* caller, without exception, today and tomorrow, including 
callers that expect failure--if all of those require printing a message,
then yes, it's time to print from the lower level routine.

Short of that, you end up with potentially excessive, and definitely
unrequested and/or undesirable printing.

> called function. It's not really different than anything else we do. If 
> we have 2 functions commonly called in sequence, we combine them into a 
> single helper function. 
> 

Right. And the rules are similar: the lower level has to be accurately
factored out. Not approximately.

thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard