Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-178798-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Zigj-lY5lnBSKuib@boqun-archlinux> <87cypvnpwn.ffs@tglx>
 <CANiq72nGHhgRjfMOhz=ss51q2egHYexPMVvWTr0RES9WAmMF=A@mail.gmail.com> <ZkNjVbqR6gYqg4YZ@boqun-archlinux>
In-Reply-To: <ZkNjVbqR6gYqg4YZ@boqun-archlinux>
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 16:21:50 +0200
Message-ID: <CANiq72nqkHazs-GRay_4LZViV43tDbCkPqWzqa28CSRE9DV7cw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rust: time: Use wrapping_sub() for Ktime::sub()
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>, 
	John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>, 
	Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@gmail.com>, Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@gmail.com>, Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>, 
	bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com, Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@proton.me>, 
	Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@samsung.com>, Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>, 
	rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Mara Bos <m-ou.se@m-ou.se>, 
	"Amanieu d'Antras" <amanieu@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 3:13=E2=80=AFPM Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> w=
rote:
>
> However, I must point out that it needs more than a customized panic
> handler to work: we also need to change the code generation (or adding
> a different flag similar to -Coverflow-checks), because the current code
> generation is Rust panic when overflow happens, which means the
> subsequent code is unreachable.

Yeah, definitely. That first step RFC is a bit ambiguous ("custom
implementations of `panic_*`"), but what we discussed was the ability
to customize the report and continue, rather than providing a
different panic handler. So the customization point function should
not return `!` for our use case, at least in the integer arithmetic
overflow case.

Cheers,
Miguel