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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJ-ks9=zWmVnspkfCqPH=+-_qZ0YZVyNrs2xMvRRvEmr-mNMcQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2026 12:07:26 -0500
From: Tamir Duberstein <tamird@...nel.org>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
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 10:13 AM Miguel Ojeda
<miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com> wrote:
>
> 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).

Thanks for the context. In that case I'll keep it as a fix and take it
through rust-analyzer-next with the backport tags since I expect it to
apply cleanly.

Cheers,
Tamir