linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] rust: Add KUNIT tests for bitfield

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CANiq72=uycGrGAVH=8KjVQ3e-P_-B0c=_mUBa1__sh44eiQ3=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2025 13:41:55 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@...dia.com>
Cc: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, dakr@...nel.org, acourbot@...dia.com, 
	Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, 
	Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, 
	Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>, bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com, 
	Benno Lossin <lossin@...nel.org>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>, 
	Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>, 
	David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>, 
	Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, 
	Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>, John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>, Timur Tabi <ttabi@...dia.com>, 
	joel@...lfernandes.org, Elle Rhumsaa <elle@...thered-steel.dev>, 
	Daniel Almeida <daniel.almeida@...labora.com>, nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] rust: Add KUNIT tests for bitfield

On Sat, Sep 20, 2025 at 2:39 AM Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@...dia.com> wrote:
>
> The C checks use BUILD_BUG_ON, in rust-for-linux we have build_assert but it
> is fragile and depends on the value being a constant.

What do you mean?

`build_assert!` works essentially like `BUILD_BUG_ON`, i.e. after the
optimizer, and does not depend on the value being a constant.

You may be thinking of `static_assert!`, which is the compiler-based one.

Cheers,
Miguel