linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scripts: generate_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: <CANiq72m8Bx=1s1+_OFxE=PFOjKrtuh_uhsomTA9VwQ4=Fz4d0g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2026 16:13:33 +0100
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Tamir Duberstein <tamird@...nel.org>
Cc: Daniel Almeida <daniel.almeida@...labora.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>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, 
	Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...gle.com>, 
	rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	stable@...r.kernel.org, Fiona Behrens <me@...enk.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scripts: generate_rust_analyzer.py: define scripts

On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 2:53 PM Tamir Duberstein <tamird@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> It depends on your perspective - I framed it as a fix of the commit
> that added the first script because that script was added without RA
> support. What do you think?

Yeah, I see.

So, on the implementation side, I don't think we expected scripts to
work at all, which is why it sounds to me like a feature (neither the
linked commit nor the one that added rust-analyzer overall support
mentions it that I can see, though it doesn't say otherwise either).

But perhaps someone out there expected it to actually work and thus
may think of it as a fix. I don't recall someone asking for it, but I
haven't checked. Perhaps someone would, when we use more and more Rust
scripts.

Now, for the backport part, according to the official rules, I think
it wouldn't fit. But those rules are often relaxed and who knows what
companies out there doing out-of-tree work on top of LTS kernels
want... (Commits can be submitted there even if they are not fixes, by
the way).

Cheers,
Miguel