linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] rust: quote: make rust-analyzer treat `core` and `std` as dependencies

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: <CAJ-ks9mxJ8Vtpg=6YEqoygfB243-KJxd7XvM3cVO69P7uTC-pg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2026 10:23:10 -0500
From: Tamir Duberstein <tamird@...il.com>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc: Jesung Yang <y.j3ms.n@...il.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>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rust: quote: make rust-analyzer treat `core` and
 `std` as dependencies

On Mon, Jan 5, 2026 at 9:06 AM Miguel Ojeda
<miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2026 at 1:12 PM Jesung Yang <y.j3ms.n@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > IIUC, to remove `std`, we need to patch our vendored `syn` as well to
> > not depend on `std`, right? I think it is indeed a desired change.
> >
> > If you don't mind, I'm happy to patch the vendored `syn` along with
> > this series if the team agrees. Alternatively, if you'd prefer to send
> > the patch yourself, please let me know.
>
> What are the advantages/disadvantages of doing so? Performance in rust-analyzer?
>
> In general, I would prefer to avoid patching vendored dependencies,
> but if there is an advantage, then I think it is fine to have small
> changes as long as upstream has merged their PR (i.e. so that we at
> least know there is a good chance we will eventually get the same
> change when we upgrade the dependency).
>
> Thanks!
>
> Cheers,
> Miguel

Yeah, I wouldn't rush to patch the vendored copy. We could just
knowingly give up on the IDE support in this tiny corner (assuming
upstream takes my patch). FWIW the only degradation here is that RA
wouldn't see the ToTokens impls for CStr and CString.