[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANiq72kD9iQh6TPo3Rwk7AmPXEarogUrM2fmhkDn5XNfKrr_jw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 11:43:06 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>, Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>,
FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
Benno Lossin <lossin@...nel.org>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>,
Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>,
rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] rust: cpu: Introduce CpuId abstraction
On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 8:07 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> What do you suggest ?
I think you are right, we should keep both directions of conversion.
(By the way, as far as I understand there is no way we could wrap
going to `i32`, but it may not hurt to add a `debug_assert!` in the
`u32` constructors.)
> Sorry, not sure I understood that. Are you talking about type of the
> `cpu` argument ?
Yeah.
Thanks!
Cheers,
Miguel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists