[PATCH v3 07/11] rust: security: replace `core::mem::zeroed` with `pin_init::zeroed`

[Paul Moore]

On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 11:31 AM Miguel Ojeda
<miguel.ojeda.sandonis at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 5:19 PM Paul Moore <paul at paul-moore.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'm happy to take this via the LSM tree, but it would be nice to see a
> > Reviewed-by/Acked-by from someone with a better understanding of Rust
> > :)
>
> I think the idea is to take all these through the Rust one with
> Acked-bys from the maintainers (or we can skip this one and do it in a
> future cycle when the first patches get in).

[CC'd the LSM list, as I just realized it wasn't on the original patch
posting; in the future please include the LSM list on LSM related Rust
patchsets/patches]

That's fine, it wasn't clear from the post that was the plan, and I
vaguely recalled from past conversations with Rust devs that they
preferred Rust wrappers/helpers to go in via the associated subsystem
tree.

> In any case, Benno is very knowledgeable in Rust -- he wrote the
> library being called here -- so unless you see something out of the
> ordinary, it seems OK to me.

My comment asking for additional review/ACK tags wasn't due to any
distrust of Benno - thank you for your work Benno - it is just a
matter of trying to make sure there are at least two sets of
(knowledgeable) eyes on a patch before it is merged.  If it is
something I'm merging into one the trees I maintain, normally I count
myself as the second set of eyes, but in this case I don't (yet)
consider myself a knowledgeable Rust reviewer so I was asking for an
additional explicit review tag.  If someone else is going to merge
this patch{set}, then it's up to them; although I would hope they
would do something similar.

-- 
paul-moore.com