linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 2/3] rust: Add bindings for device properties

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAL_Jsq+T6T_3p2C62U3v4aSjm_oc-Ycjxi_ckF0ufh=JJDz=rg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 14:35:29 -0500
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>, 
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, 
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, 
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>, 
	Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, 
	Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>, 
	Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>, Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>, Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@...il.com>, 
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/3] rust: Add bindings for device properties

On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 1:57 PM Miguel Ojeda
<miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 7:48 PM Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > One option is to define a trait for integers:

Yeah, but that doesn't feel like something I should do here. I imagine
other things might need the same thing. Perhaps the bindings for
readb/readw/readl for example. And essentially the crate:num already
has the trait I need. Shouldn't the kernel mirror that? I recall
seeing some topic of including crates in the kernel?

> +1, one more thing to consider is whether it makes sense to define a
> DT-only trait that holds all the types that can be a device property
> (like `bool` too, not just the `Integer`s).
>
> Then we can avoid e.g. `property_read_bool` and simply do it in `property_read`.

Is there no way to say must have traitA or traitB?

Rob