Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.37 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.37;
Feedback-ID: iad51458e:Fastmail
Date:   Mon, 11 Dec 2023 09:35:40 -0800
From:   Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
To:     Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Cc:     a.hindborg@samsung.com, alex.gaynor@gmail.com, arve@android.com,
        benno.lossin@proton.me, bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com,
        brauner@kernel.org, cmllamas@google.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com,
        dxu@dxuuu.xyz, gary@garyguo.net, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
        joel@joelfernandes.org, keescook@chromium.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        maco@android.com, ojeda@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
        rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, surenb@google.com,
        tglx@linutronix.de, tkjos@android.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
        wedsonaf@gmail.com, willy@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] rust: cred: add Rust abstraction for `struct cred`
Message-ID: <ZXdIbEqSCTO62BHE@boqun-archlinux>
References: <ZXZjoOrO5q7no4or@boqun-archlinux>
 <20231211153429.4161511-1-aliceryhl@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20231211153429.4161511-1-aliceryhl@google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 03:34:29PM +0000, Alice Ryhl wrote:
> Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 11:59:47AM +0000, Alice Ryhl wrote:
> > [...]
> > > @@ -151,6 +152,21 @@ pub fn as_ptr(&self) -> *mut bindings::file {
> > >          self.0.get()
> > >      }
> > >  
> > > +    /// Returns the credentials of the task that originally opened the file.
> > > +    pub fn cred(&self) -> &Credential {
> > 
> > I wonder whether it would be helpful if we use explicit lifetime here:
> > 
> >     pub fn cred<'file>(&'file self) -> &'file Credential
> > 
> > It might be easier for people to get. For example, the lifetime of the
> > returned Credential reference is constrainted by 'file, the lifetime of
> > the file reference.
> > 
> > But yes, maybe need to hear others' feedback first.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Boqun
> 
> That would trigger a compiler warning because the lifetime is
> unnecessary.
> 

We can disable that warning if people need the information. Code is
mostly for reading, less often for compilation and changes.

> The safety comment explains what the signature means. I think that
> should be enough.
> 

For someone who has a good understanding of Rust lifetime (and the
elision), yes. But I'm wondering whether all the people feel the same
way.

Regards,
Boqun

> Alice