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: <CANiq72k4MFe2qL5XrweObo-bxT9qPA6+GAF4bSwLzyQJRX-mJw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2023 13:07:43 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, tmgross@...ch.edu, benno.lossin@...ton.me, 
	wedsonaf@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v7 0/5] Rust abstractions for network PHY drivers

On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 12:55 AM Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
>
> You will probably find different levels of acceptance of 80 to 100 in
> different subsystems. So i'm not sure you will be able to achieve
> consistence.

I would definitely agree if this were C. I happen to maintain
`.clang-format`, and it was an interesting process to approximate a
"common enough" style as the base one.

But for Rust, it is easy, because all the code is new. All Rust files
are formatted the same way, across the entire kernel.

> It should also be noted that 80, or 100, is not a strict limit. Being
> able to grep the kernel for strings is important. So the coding
> standard allows you to go passed this limit in order that you don't
> need to break a string. checkpatch understands this. I don't know if
> your automated tools support such exceptions.

Not breaking string literals is the default behavior of `rustfmt` (and
we use its default behavior).

It is also definitely possible to turn off `rustfmt` locally, i.e. for
particular "items" (e.g. a function, a block, a statement), rather
than lines, which is very convenient.

However, as far as I recall, we have never needed to disable it. I am
sure it will eventually be needed somewhere, but what I am trying to
say is that it works well enough that one can just use it.

Cheers,
Miguel

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ