linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] rust: clk: use the type-state pattern

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: <DFSLCI9U4NCW.2HI2UPUI7G134@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2026 14:13:48 +0100
From: "Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@...nel.org>
To: "Daniel Almeida" <daniel.almeida@...labora.com>
Cc: "Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, "Maxime Ripard"
 <mripard@...nel.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, "Viresh
 Kumar" <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>, "Maarten Lankhorst"
 <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, "Thomas Zimmermann"
 <tzimmermann@...e.de>, "David Airlie" <airlied@...il.com>, "Simona Vetter"
 <simona@...ll.ch>, "Drew Fustini" <fustini@...nel.org>, "Guo Ren"
 <guoren@...nel.org>, "Fu Wei" <wefu@...hat.com>,
 Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@...nel.org>, "Michael
 Turquette" <mturquette@...libre.com>, "Stephen Boyd" <sboyd@...nel.org>,
 "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>, "Trevor Gross" <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
 <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
 <linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
 <rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] rust: clk: use the type-state pattern

On Mon Jan 19, 2026 at 1:54 PM CET, Daniel Almeida wrote:
>> On 19 Jan 2026, at 09:35, Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com> wrote:
>> I think that if you still want an API where you just call enable/disable
>> directly on it with no protection against unbalanced calls, then that
>> should be the special API. Probably called RawClk and functions marked
>> unsafe. Unbalanced calls seem really dangerous and use should not be
>> encouraged.

+1; and unless there is a use-case that requires otherwise, it should not even
be possible to do this at all -- at least for driver code.

> I think we should discourage RawClk if at all possible. But if the consensus
> is that we *really* need this easily-abused thing, I can provide a follow-up.

I think we should only do this if there are use-case with no alternative, so far
there haven't been any AFAIK.