[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aFQS5egeo4xfFbNF@Mac.home>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2025 06:38:45 -0700
From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
To: Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>
Cc: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>, alex.gaynor@...il.com,
ojeda@...nel.org, aliceryhl@...gle.com, anna-maria@...utronix.de,
bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com, dakr@...nel.org, frederic@...nel.org,
gary@...yguo.net, jstultz@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
lossin@...nel.org, lyude@...hat.com, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
sboyd@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, tmgross@...ch.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rust: time: Seal the ClockSource trait
On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 02:57:12PM +0200, Andreas Hindborg wrote:
[...]
> >>
> >>
> >> pub trait ClockSource {
> >> /// The kernel clock ID associated with this clock source.
> >> ///
> >> /// This constant corresponds to the C side `clockid_t` value.
> >> const ID: bindings::clockid_t;
> >>
> >> The constant used to identify the clock source when calling into C APIs.
> >
> > Ah, I see. Sorry to ask another question, but can we require
> > correlation between ID and the value fetched by `ktime_get`?
>
> Yes, I think we should. As in, `ClockSource::ktime_get` must return the
> time associated with the clock specified by `ClockSource::ID`.
>
> >The value
> > fetched by ktime_get is opaque, isn't it?
>
> It is, but the implementation must still fetch the correct counter, right?
> Not sure if it could lead to UB if it did not though 🤷
>
The reason that we need ktime_get() to return value in [0, KTIME_MAX) is
because Instant's type invariants (and Instant's type invariants is for
subtraction not overflowing), so I would say this is not a safety
requirement for impl ClockSource.
Regards,
Boqun
>
> Best regards,
> Andreas Hindborg
>
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists