netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/3] rust: core abstractions for network PHY drivers

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]

Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2023 09:29:19 +0900 (JST)
From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>
To: miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com
Cc: fujita.tomonori@...il.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, andrew@...n.ch,
 tmgross@...ch.edu, wedsonaf@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/3] rust: core abstractions for network
 PHY drivers

On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 11:59:01 +0200
Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 5:50 PM FUJITA Tomonori
> <fujita.tomonori@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> What feedback? enum stuff? I think that it's a long-term issue.
> 
> Not just that. There has been other feedback, and since this message,
> we got new reviews too.
> 
> But, yes, the `--rustified-enum` is one of those. I am still
> uncomfortable with it. It is not a huge deal for a while, and things
> will work, and the risk of UB is low. But why do we want to risk it?
> The point of using Rust is precisely to avoid this sort of thing.

Possibly, I don't correctly understand what your risk means.

You are talking about the risk of UB, which happens when PHYLIB sets a
random value to the state enum, right? It only happens when PHYLIB has
a bug. If PHYLIB has such bug, likely the NIC doesn't work, the user
would report the system failure.

In such situation, a Rust PHY driver can find that bug if C enum isn't
not used directly. You think that that's what Rust should do?