linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rust: id

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: <aS7aHIJbi3DlaUcc@google.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2025 12:22:52 +0000
From: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Burak Emir <bqe@...gle.com>, 
	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 <lossin@...nel.org>, 
	Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>, Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>, 
	Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rust: id_pool: fix example

On Tue, Dec 02, 2025 at 12:13:33AM +0100, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 1, 2025 at 8:29 PM Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Miguel,
> >
> > I applied this, but the fact that you've sent a second fix to
> > documentation that actually is a build fix, raises the questions.
> >
> > Because Rust documentation bears compilable chunks of code, I think
> > we need to enable rustdoc tests target by default, so that developers
> > will not send broken tests.
> 
> You're welcome!
> 
> This one is a Kconfig in the normal build, i.e.
> `CONFIG_RUST_KERNEL_DOCTESTS` (it is true that the other patch was for
> a different target).
> 
> If you mean enabling that by Kconfig default, then I don't think we
> can do that -- KUnit on its own (which this uses) is not meant for
> normal builds. Perhaps we could have something that just checks the
> build, but people should really run the doctests anyway, since they
> typically contain `assert!`s and so on that can be wrong.
> 
> If you mean enabling it in Intel's kernel test robot, then I think
> they do it (or at least I told them about it long ago). But maybe
> something is missing.
> 
> In our P entry in `MAINTAINERS` ("Subsystem Profile document") we ask
> people to run them among other things, so I would perhaps suggest
> having something like that too (or linking to ours if you prefer):
> 
>     https://rust-for-linux.com/contributing#submit-checklist-addendum
> 
> Of course new contributors will miss that initially, but actually
> people find the doctests quite useful, so generally people get to run
> them. At the end of the day, maintainers should test these too before
> applying and otherwise someone will notice sooner or later.

Yeah sorry I forgot to check the docs this time. I usually do run them,
but there are so many targets to check that sometimes I forget some of
them.

Alice