From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
To: Marc Herbert <marc.herbert@linux.intel.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>, <Benjamin.Cheatham@amd.com>,
<Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>, <dakr@kernel.org>,
<dan.j.williams@intel.com>, <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>, <rafael@kernel.org>,
<sudeep.holla@arm.com>, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>,
Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] driver core: faux: fix Undefined Behavior in faux_device_destroy()
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2025 17:23:10 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6853586e9d366_1f9e10087@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bcd3848d-54dd-453e-b0b5-91cb72160645@linux.intel.com>
Marc Herbert wrote:
[..]
> In other words, by turning this off unconditionally at the global level,
> the kernel could actually lose (surprise!) some performance.
I expect the answer is that any compiler that does fail to convert this
to defined behavior is not suitable for compiling the kernel.
The issue is not "oh hey, this fixup in this case is tiny", it is
"changing this precedent implicates a large flag day audit". I am
certain this is one of many optimizations that the kernel is willing to
sacrifice.
Otherwise, the massive effort to remove undefined behavior from the
kernel and allow for complier optimzations around that removal is called
the "Rust for Linux" project.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-19 0:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-13 19:15 [PATCH] driver core: faux: fix Undefined Behavior in faux_device_destroy() marc.herbert
2025-06-13 20:20 ` Miguel Ojeda
2025-06-14 0:33 ` Greg KH
2025-06-14 10:50 ` Miguel Ojeda
2025-06-14 11:53 ` Greg KH
2025-06-14 14:53 ` Marc Herbert
2025-06-16 3:35 ` Greg KH
2025-06-16 14:02 ` Alice Ryhl
2025-06-18 23:43 ` Marc Herbert
2025-06-19 0:23 ` Dan Williams [this message]
2025-06-19 2:35 ` Dan Carpenter
2025-06-19 3:33 ` Marc Herbert
2025-06-19 4:02 ` Dan Carpenter
2025-06-26 0:55 ` Kent Overstreet
2025-06-30 23:24 ` Marc Herbert
2025-06-25 15:20 ` Dan Carpenter
2025-06-25 22:30 ` Marc Herbert
2025-06-25 23:18 ` Dan Carpenter
2025-06-25 15:21 ` Dan Carpenter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=6853586e9d366_1f9e10087@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch \
--to=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=Benjamin.Cheatham@amd.com \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=dan.carpenter@linaro.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.herbert@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox