linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] rust: add system_dfl() around the new system_dfl

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: <aYMk5skDB0Rk7vWS@google.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2026 10:52:22 +0000
From: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>
To: Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>
Cc: Marco Crivellari <marco.crivellari@...e.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, 
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>, Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>, 
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, 
	Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] rust: add system_dfl() around the new system_dfl_wq

On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 03:53:39PM +0000, Gary Guo wrote:
> Is there any reason that we cannot migrate the user early by just returning
> `system_dfl_wq` inside `system_unbound`? (I guess the question also applies on
> why system_unbound_wq cannot be the same pointer as system_dfl_wq).

I think this is confusing. Let's just rename it here and update the
callers. Otherwise Rust gets out of sync with C naming-wise.

> Also, I feel that `dfl` is not a very intuitive name. I searched the list and
> the commit history for a while and cannot find the exact explaination on what it
> means? Does it mean "default" or something else?

This I agree with. dfl is not a good name. Let's at least call it
"default" or "unbound" or whatever.

Alice