[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <DB9BG6DSV693.39JY1VAOQSUMZ@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2025 17:03:52 +0200
From: "Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@...nel.org>
To: "Alistair Popple" <apopple@...dia.com>
Cc: "Benno Lossin" <lossin@...nel.org>, <rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>,
"Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Krzysztof Wilczyński <kwilczynski@...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>, "Andreas
Hindborg" <a.hindborg@...nel.org>, "Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
"Trevor Gross" <tmgross@...ch.edu>, "Greg Kroah-Hartman"
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
"John Hubbard" <jhubbard@...dia.com>, "Alexandre Courbot"
<acourbot@...dia.com>, <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] rust: Update PCI binding safety comments and add
inline compiler hint
On Fri Jul 11, 2025 at 1:22 AM CEST, Alistair Popple wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 10:01:05AM +0200, Benno Lossin wrote:
>> On Thu Jul 10, 2025 at 4:24 AM CEST, Alistair Popple wrote:
>> > diff --git a/rust/kernel/pci.rs b/rust/kernel/pci.rs
>> > index 8435f8132e38..5c35a66a5251 100644
>> > --- a/rust/kernel/pci.rs
>> > +++ b/rust/kernel/pci.rs
>> > @@ -371,14 +371,18 @@ fn as_raw(&self) -> *mut bindings::pci_dev {
>> >
>> > impl Device {
>> > /// Returns the PCI vendor ID.
>> > + #[inline]
>> > pub fn vendor_id(&self) -> u16 {
>> > - // SAFETY: `self.as_raw` is a valid pointer to a `struct pci_dev`.
>> > + // SAFETY: by its type invariant `self.as_raw` is always a valid pointer to a
>>
>> s/by its type invariant/by the type invariants of `Self`,/
>> s/always//
>>
>> Also, which invariant does this refer to? The only one that I can see
>> is:
>>
>> /// A [`Device`] instance represents a valid `struct device` created by the C portion of the kernel.
>
> Actually isn't that wrong? Shouldn't that read for "a valid `struct pci_dev`"?
Yes, and it's fixed in the driver-core tree already. :)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists