linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC] soc: qcom: socinfo: Re-implement in Rust

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: <5fbecf9c-b8bc-4027-ae30-d7c49212bc56@kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2025 02:50:14 +0000
From: Bryan O'Donoghue <bod@...nel.org>
To: Matthew Maurer <mmaurer@...gle.com>,
 Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
 Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>,
 Satya Durga Srinivasu Prabhala <satyap@...cinc.com>,
 Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, 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>, Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
 Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>, Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>
Cc: Trilok Soni <tsoni@...cinc.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] soc: qcom: socinfo: Re-implement in Rust

On 13/12/2025 00:36, Matthew Maurer wrote:

> +//! Re-implementation of Qualcomm's Socinfo driver in Rust
> +use core::fmt;
> +use core::fmt::Formatter;
> +use kernel::debugfs::{Scope, ScopedDir};
> +use kernel::device::Core;
> +use kernel::module_platform_driver;
> +use kernel::platform::{self, Device};
> +use kernel::prelude::{fmt, pin_data, Error, PinInit, Result};
> +use kernel::soc;
> +use kernel::str::{CStr, CStrExt, CString};
> +use kernel::transmute::FromBytes;
> +use kernel::{c_str, pr_warn, try_pin_init};
> +use pin_init::pin_init_scope;

Probably learning more from your patch than being in a position to 
review - thanks for that.

One thing I notice is that, in C we alphabetise the includes.

What is the normative coding standard for rust stuff I'm not sure. Is 
there any technical reason not to do the same as C includes alphabetising ?

You appear to sort these kernel:: use statements earlier on in the patch.

---
bod