linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] rust: remove `#[allow(clippy::non_send_fields_in_send

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: <20250628133013.703461c8@nimda.home>
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2025 13:30:13 +0300
From: Onur <work@...rozkan.dev>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc: rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
 kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, airlied@...il.com, simona@...ll.ch,
 ojeda@...nel.org, alex.gaynor@...il.com, boqun.feng@...il.com,
 gary@...yguo.net, bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com, lossin@...nel.org,
 a.hindborg@...nel.org, aliceryhl@...gle.com, tmgross@...ch.edu,
 rafael@...nel.org, viresh.kumar@...aro.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
 maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com, mripard@...nel.org, tzimmermann@...e.de,
 davidgow@...gle.com, nm@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] rust: remove
 `#[allow(clippy::non_send_fields_in_send_ty)]`

On Sat, 28 Jun 2025 09:13:50 +0200
Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Jun 28, 2025 at 6:10 AM Onur Özkan <work@...rozkan.dev> wrote:
> >
> > Clippy no longer complains about this lint.
> 
> Do you have more context? For instance, do you know since when it no
> longer complains, or why was the reason for the change? i.e. why we
> had the `allow` in the first place, so that we know we don't need it
> anymore?
> 
> For instance, please how I reasoned about it in commit 5e7c9b84ad08
> ("rust: sync: remove unneeded
> `#[allow(clippy::non_send_fields_in_send_ty)]`").
> 
> (It may happen to be the same reason, or not.)
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Cheers,
> Miguel

It doesn't seem to be the same reason. I rebased over
c6af9a1191d042839e56abff69e8b0302d117988 (the exact commit where that
lint was added) but still Clippy did not complain about it on the
MSRV. So it was either a leftover, or there is a version between
1.78 and the current stable where Clippy did complain. I can dig into it
more during the week if you would like.

IMO, we should require people to add a comment explaining the reason
for adding these lint rules to the codebase. It would make both reading
and modifying the code much simpler and clearer.

Regards,
Onur