Documentation: rust: add coding guidelines on lints

In the C side, disabling diagnostics locally, i.e. within the source code,
is rare (at least in the kernel). Sometimes warnings are manipulated
via the flags at the translation unit level, but that is about it.

In Rust, it is easier to change locally the "level" of lints
(e.g. allowing them locally). In turn, this means it is easier to
globally enable more lints that may trigger a few false positives here
and there that need to be allowed ocally, but that generally can spot
issues or bugs.

Thus document this.

Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <[email protected]>

Author: ojeda

Documentation/rust/coding-guidelines.rst

@@ -227,3 +227,32 @@ The equivalent in Rust may look like (ignoring documentation):
 That is, the equivalent of ``GPIO_LINE_DIRECTION_IN`` would be referred to as
 ``gpio::LineDirection::In``. In particular, it should not be named
 ``gpio::gpio_line_direction::GPIO_LINE_DIRECTION_IN``.
+
+
+Lints
+-----
+
+In Rust, it is possible to ``allow`` particular warnings (diagnostics, lints)
+locally, making the compiler ignore instances of a given warning within a given
+function, module, block, etc.
+
+It is similar to ``#pragma GCC diagnostic push`` + ``ignored`` + ``pop`` in C:
+
+.. code-block:: c
+
+	#pragma GCC diagnostic push
+	#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wunused-function"
+	static void f(void) {}
+	#pragma GCC diagnostic pop
+
+But way less verbose:
+
+.. code-block:: rust
+
+	#[allow(dead_code)]
+	fn f() {}
+
+By that virtue, it makes it possible to comfortably enable more diagnostics by
+default (i.e. outside ``W=`` levels). In particular, those that may have some
+false positives but that are otherwise quite useful to keep enabled to catch
+potential mistakes.