linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] rust: add `bitfield!` and `register!` macros

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: <DFTITPLFU1HB.3VCKBVLW2VCPI@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 16:27:53 +0100
From: "Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@...nel.org>
To: "Miguel Ojeda" <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc: "Alexandre Courbot" <acourbot@...dia.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>, "Yury Norov" <yury.norov@...il.com>,
 "John Hubbard" <jhubbard@...dia.com>, "Alistair Popple"
 <apopple@...dia.com>, "Joel Fernandes" <joelagnelf@...dia.com>, "Timur
 Tabi" <ttabi@...dia.com>, "Edwin Peer" <epeer@...dia.com>, "Eliot Courtney"
 <ecourtney@...dia.com>, "Daniel Almeida" <daniel.almeida@...labora.com>,
 "Dirk Behme" <dirk.behme@...bosch.com>, "Steven Price"
 <steven.price@....com>, <rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>,
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] rust: add `bitfield!` and `register!` macros

On Tue Jan 20, 2026 at 3:57 PM CET, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> I want to make things easy for everyone, and I know there is pressure
> to deliver etc., but yeah... I am supposed to also push back when
> things get stretched a bit too much... :)

I think it would be good if drivers other than nova-core would finally be able
to use the register!() macro, rather than having to go with raw I/O operations.

> Having said that, depending on what the "local bitfield!" entails,
> i.e. how much of a hack/workaround/extra work it is, it may be best to
> avoid it and go directly for `bitfield!`.

I think it's just about pasting the current bitfield work into register.rs, such
that it can only be used from there. In a follow up we can work out how it
should turn out finally and have to patches: 1. introduce bitfield.rs and 2.
move register!() to use the code from bitfield.rs.

I also proposed that at the end of last cycle [1] because I think the two things
are mostly orthogonal and we don't need to stall register!() on the generic
bitfield work.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/DDC49ZIRX79X.2Q4KW0UY7WUF3@kernel.org/

> But for that to happen, we would need Linus to really do the -rc8, and
> very fast agreements and reviews on it.

The register!() macro code is worked on by Alex for about 10 month in nova-core,
the first RFC for general I/O infrastructure is from March 2025 and the current
series has been discussed on the list for about two cycles.

Given the above, that doesn't seem too unrealistic, let's see.

> It seems to me the easiest is that I give you a branch/tag for you
> (and others that want it) to merge with the `bitfield!` one next
> cycle. That would avoid the workaround too and Alexandre having to
> come up with another series etc.

You mean a tag with the bitfield!() code? Yeah, that would help if we don't make
it this cycle.