linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] gpu: nova-core: gsp: clarify comments about invariants and pointer roles

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: <DG05UZS433N1.378WELIDPRZVE@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2026 11:46:59 +0100
From: "Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@...nel.org>
To: "Alexandre Courbot" <acourbot@...dia.com>
Cc: "Eliot Courtney" <ecourtney@...dia.com>, "Gary Guo" <gary@...yguo.net>,
 "Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, "David Airlie" <airlied@...il.com>,
 "Simona Vetter" <simona@...ll.ch>, "Alistair Popple" <apopple@...dia.com>,
 <nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>,
 <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 "dri-devel" <dri-devel-bounces@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] gpu: nova-core: gsp: clarify comments about
 invariants and pointer roles

On Wed Jan 28, 2026 at 9:17 AM CET, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Wed Jan 28, 2026 at 1:35 PM JST, Eliot Courtney wrote:
>> On Tue Jan 27, 2026 at 3:04 AM JST, Gary Guo wrote:
>>> I wonder if this can be `is within 0..MSGQ_NUM_PAGES`. What do others think?
>>
>> I think this is very reasonable, since this is part of the rust
>> range syntax so it should be understandable. I also considered the
>> mathematical syntax `[0, MSGQ_NUM_PAGES)`, but not sure if this would
>> be conventional - it does seem that this notation is used in a bunch
>> of places though. Will apply your suggestion in the next version unless
>> there is a definitive convention for this.
>
> Since this is Rust code, the Rust syntax to express ranges (within ``
> quotes) makes sense IMHO.

While I really like the mathematical syntax, I think using the Rust syntax is
superior, as it requires zero mental cycles to translate it to what is likely to
be found in the code as well.

(There also have been some considerations of using tools to validate safety
comments or invariants to some extend eventually.)