netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/2] rust: add delay abstraction

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: <CANiq72n5y7ruB1bgGquONWctPK=LBZUWugBAP_1QOSzvOY+amw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2024 12:50:51 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, aliceryhl@...gle.com, andrew@...n.ch, 
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, hkallweit1@...il.com, 
	tmgross@...ch.edu, ojeda@...nel.org, alex.gaynor@...il.com, gary@...yguo.net, 
	bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com, benno.lossin@...ton.me, a.hindborg@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/2] rust: add delay abstraction

On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 3:24 AM FUJITA Tomonori
<fujita.tomonori@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Rust abstractions are typically merged with their users. I'm trying to
> push the delay abstractions with a fix for QT2025 PHY driver
> (drivers/net/phy/qt2025.rs), which uses delay.

To clarify, in case it helps: users indeed drive the need for
abstractions (i.e. we don't merge abstractions without an expected
user), and it can happen that they go together in the same patch
series for convenience, that is true.

However, I don't think I would say "typically", since most
abstractions went in on their own so far, and each patch still needs
to Cc the relevant maintainers/lists and the respective maintainers
should say they are OK moving it through another tree.

In other words, the "default" is that the abstractions go through
their tree, i.e. delay wouldn't go through netdev, unless the
maintainers are OK with that (e.g. perhaps because it is simpler in a
given case).

I have some more notes at
https://rust-for-linux.com/contributing#the-rust-subsystem.

Of course, in most cases to review abstractions it helps seeing the
expected user, so sometimes it may help to show the users in the same
patch series, and sometimes it may make more sense to just add a link
to Lore to the user, or to a branch; and sometimes examples in the
commit message or in the abstractions' docs themselves are enough.

Cheers,
Miguel