[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250228070944.an5mbauxvxkfnn6p@vireshk-i7>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 12:39:44 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>
Cc: a.hindborg@...nel.org, alex.gaynor@...il.com, benno.lossin@...ton.me,
bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com, boqun.feng@...il.com, dakr@...hat.com,
gary@...yguo.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux@...musvillemoes.dk, ojeda@...nel.org,
rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, tmgross@...ch.edu,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, yury.norov@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] rust: Add initial cpumask abstractions
On 27-02-25, 13:19, Alice Ryhl wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 11:46 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> > impl Cpumask {
> > - /// Creates a reference to an existing `struct cpumask` pointer.
> > + /// Creates a mutable reference to an existing `struct cpumask` pointer.
> > ///
> > /// # Safety
> > ///
> > /// The caller must ensure that `ptr` is valid for writing and remains valid for the lifetime
> > /// of the returned reference.
> > - pub unsafe fn from_raw_mut<'a>(ptr: *mut bindings::cpumask) -> &'a mut Self {
> > + pub unsafe fn from_raw_mut<'a>(ptr: *mut bindings::cpumask_var_t) -> &'a mut Self {
>
> Why?
cpufreq core has a pointer to cpumask_var_t.
> Perhaps put this on the CpumaskBox and keep the `struct cpumask` one here?
Yeah, that worked. I think we will anyway have both type of users and
its better to have both implemented.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists