[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87cyaamt6y.fsf@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2025 20:30:13 +0200
From: Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>
To: "Benno Lossin" <lossin@...nel.org>
Cc: "Miguel Ojeda" <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>, "Oliver Mangold"
<oliver.mangold@...me>, "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>, "Alice
Ryhl" <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, "Trevor Gross" <tmgross@...ch.edu>, "Asahi
Lina" <lina+kernel@...hilina.net>, <rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 1/4] rust: types: Add Ownable/Owned types
"Benno Lossin" <lossin@...nel.org> writes:
> On Tue Jul 8, 2025 at 12:16 PM CEST, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 8, 2025 at 11:57 AM Oliver Mangold <oliver.mangold@...me> wrote:
>>>
>>> Note, though, that I already moved it from types.rs to types/ownable.rs on
>>> request. It seems to me different people here have different ideas where it
>>> should be placed. I feel now, that it would make sense to come to an
>>> agreement between the interested parties about where it should finally be
>>> placed, before I move it again. Could I ask that we settle that question
>>> once and for all before my next revision?
>>
>> Yeah, if there is a disagreement with something said previously, then
>> it should be resolved before starting to ping-pong between approaches
>> with more and more patch versions. Reviewers can forget or they may
>> not have read an earlier comment, but you did the right thing
>> mentioning there is such a conflict in opinions.
>
> Yeah, I checked and that was Andreas on v9. @Andreas what do you think?
>
> I think we should just get rid of `types.rs` and split it into:
>
> * `opaque.rs`
> * `foreign.rs`
> * `scope_guard.rs` (this might need a better name)
>
> `Either` can just be removed entirely, `AlwaysRefcounted` & `ARef`
> should be in the `sync` module (I already created an issue for this) as
> well as `NotThreadSafe` (or we could create a `marker` module for that).
> Thoughts?
Sounds good. I just wanted to prevent us from cramming everything into
types.rs.
But we should probably move `Owned` into `sync` with `ARef` et. al.,
right?
Best regards,
Andreas Hindborg
Powered by blists - more mailing lists