linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] rust: Introduce file_from

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: <CANiq72k+d3FzM8O7R9_WrpU3o3RygpGAS3S0Z5wPZsvC3k6=WA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2025 17:28:41 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, 
	ojeda@...nel.org, alex.gaynor@...il.com, gary@...yguo.net, 
	bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com, benno.lossin@...ton.me, a.hindborg@...sung.com, 
	aliceryhl@...gle.com, tmgross@...ch.edu, dakr@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com, 
	peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org, 
	dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, 
	mgorman@...e.de, vschneid@...hat.com, pmladek@...e.com, 
	fujita.tomonori@...il.com, mingo@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] rust: Introduce file_from_location()

On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 3:42 PM Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Will do, one thing though: the comment lines seem to wrap at 78 or 80
> chars, so do other lines for conditional features in rust/kernel/lib.rs.
> However I believe in Rust code we use 100 chars text width, any
> particular reason that I should keep these new lines the same (wrapping
> at 80 characters)? Otherwise I will make the new lines wrap at 100.

We have both styles, so up to you.

It would have been nice to at least know already if `rustfmt` would
eventually land on 80 or 100 for this, even if the automatically
wrapping is not stable :(

> Sure, will do, but I'm afraid there is only case, unless I misunderstood
> you:

I meant the "If `file_with_nul()` is not available" vs. the available
one (since it is mentioned in the docs already).

> /// use kernel::file_from_location;

I would hide this line, since it is a single import of the item itself.

> ///     pr_info!("{}\n", file_from_location(caller));

I would suggest adding a comment on top of this line mentioning the
output it could potentially show, e.g.

    // Output: ...

Thanks for this!

Cheers,
Miguel