[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230403082052.GR4253@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2023 10:20:52 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc: Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>,
rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Wedson Almeida Filho <walmeida@...rosoft.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/13] rust: lock: introduce `Mutex`
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 11:47:12AM -0700, Boqun Feng wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 03:01:08PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 01:39:44AM -0300, Wedson Almeida Filho wrote:
> > > From: Wedson Almeida Filho <walmeida@...rosoft.com>
> > >
> > > This is the `struct mutex` lock backend and allows Rust code to use the
> > > kernel mutex idiomatically.
> >
> > What, if anything, are the plans to support the various lockdep
> > annotations? Idem for the spinlock thing in the other patch I suppose.
>
> FWIW:
>
> * At the init stage, SpinLock and Mutex in Rust use initializers
> that are aware of the lockdep, so everything (lockdep_map and
> lock_class) is all set up.
>
> * At acquire or release time, Rust locks just use ffi to call C
> functions that have lockdep annotations in them, so lockdep
> should just work.
>
ffi is what the C++ world calls RAII ?
But yes, I got that far, but I wondered about things like
spin_lock_nested(&foo, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING) and other such 'advanced'
annotations.
Surely we're going to be needing them at some point. I suppose you can
do the single depth nesting one with a special guard type (or whatever
you call that in the rust world) ?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists