linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 4/6] rust: irq: add support for threaded IRQs and handlers

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: <CANiq72keAJxDQHHa5gAoFyV1rXpdf_r_vY1R5bFyRC4ph3BRUA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2025 20:30:35 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>
Cc: Daniel Almeida <daniel.almeida@...labora.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>, 
	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>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Benno Lossin <lossin@...nel.org>, 
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, Krzysztof Wilczyński <kwilczynski@...nel.org>, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/6] rust: irq: add support for threaded IRQs and handlers

On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 8:13 PM Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2025 at 01:24:40PM -0300, Daniel Almeida wrote:
> >
> > This iteration converted register() from pub to pub(crate). The idea was to
> > force drivers to use the accessors. I assumed this was enough to make the API
> > safe, as the few users in the kernel crate (i.e.: so far platform and pci)
> > could be manually checked for correctness.
> >
> > To summarize my point, there is still the possibility of misusing this from the
> > kernel crate itself, but that is no longer possible from a driver's
> > perspective.
>
> Correct, you made Registration::new() crate private, such that drivers can't
> access it anymore. But that doesn't make the function safe by itself. It's still
> unsafe to be used from platform::Device and pci::Device.

Yeah.

Even if a function is fully private (i.e. not even `pub(crate)`), then
it should still be marked as unsafe if it is so.

Cheers,
Miguel