[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANiq72nPLn+3V_DhN9_dmKnRrb5mfjzQ67Utz7HdtOY3McpweA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2025 12:42:27 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>
Cc: 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>,
Benno Lossin <lossin@...nel.org>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>,
Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>, Georgi Djakov <djakov@...nel.org>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@....qualcomm.com>,
Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] rust: Add initial interconnect framework abstractions
Hi Konrad,
Some quick mostly doc-related comments...
On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 11:14 PM Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> +//! Interconnect abstractions
Please follow the usual style, i.e. ending sentences with a period.
> +//! (based on clk.rs)
Is there a reason to mention this in the documentation? If not, I
would probably mention it in the commit message instead.
> +//! C headers:
> +//! [`include/linux/interconnect.h`](srctree/include/linux/interconnect.h)
> +//! [`include/linux/interconnect-provider.h`](srctree/include/linux/interconnect-provider.h)
Please see if this looks as expected when rendered -- you may want an
" and " or a comma or similar.
> +/// The interconnect framework bandidth unit.
Typo.
> +/// Represents a bus bandwidth request in kBps, wrapping a [`u32`] value.
> +#[derive(Copy, Clone, PartialEq, Eq, Debug)]
> +pub struct IccBwUnit(pub u32);
Since there are accessors below, do the internal details need to be public?
> + /// Create a new instance from gigabytes (GB) per second
> + pub const fn from_gigabytes_per_sec(gbps: u32) -> Self {
> + Self(gbps * 1000 * 1000)
> + }
I guess this means callers must call this with reasonable numbers and
otherwise it is considered a bug, right? i.e. this could overflow, and
thus panic under `CONFIG_RUST_OVERFLOW_CHECKS=y`.
> +impl From<IccBwUnit> for u32 {
> + fn from(bw: IccBwUnit) -> Self {
> + bw.0
> + }
> +}
Is this needed since there are more explicit accessors?
> +#[cfg(CONFIG_INTERCONNECT)]
> +mod icc_path {
Maybe a different file?
> + /// Rust abstraction for the C [`struct icc_path`]
This intra-doc link is probably broken, since it refers to C --
normally you need an explicit link for this. Please check the docs via
`make .... rustdoc`.
> + /// The following example demonstrates hwo to obtain and configure an interconnect path for
Typo.
> + /// // bus_path goes out of scope and self-disables if there are no other users
Please follow the usual formatting for comments, i.e. Markdown and
ending with a period.
> + // SAFETY: It's always safe to call [`of_icc_get`]
Comments don't need intra-doc links, since they do not get rendered
(sadly -- a long-term wish of mine is having `rustdoc` link those in
the source view and thus checked too).
> + // SAFETY: By the type invariants, self.as_raw() is a valid argument for `icc_enable`].
That seems like half of an intra-doc link :)
> +// SAFETY: An `IccPath` is always reference-counted and can be released from any thread.
> +unsafe impl Send for IccPath {}
This gives an error, right? Was it meant to be inside the other Rust module?
Also, please also run `make .... rustfmt`.
Finally, the examples in the docs are converted automatically into
KUnit tests (under `CONFIG_RUST_KERNEL_DOCTESTS=y`) -- the examples
currently have build errors.
We have some extra notes at:
https://rust-for-linux.com/contributing#submit-checklist-addendum
on things that are useful to test/check.
I hope that helps!
Cheers,
Miguel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists