[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aJn2ogBSmedhpuCa@Mac.home>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 06:56:50 -0700
From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
To: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>
Cc: Daniel Almeida <daniel.almeida@...labora.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>,
Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Krzysztof Wilczy´nski <kwilczynski@...nel.org>,
Benno Lossin <lossin@...nel.org>, Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rust: irq: add &Device<Bound> argument to irq
callbacks
On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 12:33:51PM +0000, Alice Ryhl wrote:
[...]
> @@ -207,8 +207,8 @@ pub fn new<'a>(
> inner <- Devres::new(
> request.dev,
> try_pin_init!(RegistrationInner {
> - // SAFETY: `this` is a valid pointer to the `Registration` instance
> - cookie: unsafe { &raw mut (*this.as_ptr()).handler }.cast(),
> + // INVARIANT: `this` is a valid pointer to the `Registration` instance
> + cookie: this.as_ptr().cast::<c_void>(),
At this moment the `Regstration` is not fully initialized...
> irq: {
> // SAFETY:
> // - The callbacks are valid for use with request_irq.
> @@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ pub fn new<'a>(
> Some(handle_irq_callback::<T>),
> flags.into_inner(),
> name.as_char_ptr(),
> - (&raw mut (*this.as_ptr()).handler).cast(),
> + this.as_ptr().cast::<c_void>(),
> )
... and interrupt can happen right after request_irq() ...
> })?;
> request.irq
> @@ -258,9 +258,13 @@ pub fn synchronize(&self, dev: &Device<Bound>) -> Result {
> ///
> /// This function should be only used as the callback in `request_irq`.
> unsafe extern "C" fn handle_irq_callback<T: Handler>(_irq: i32, ptr: *mut c_void) -> c_uint {
> - // SAFETY: `ptr` is a pointer to T set in `Registration::new`
> - let handler = unsafe { &*(ptr as *const T) };
> - T::handle(handler) as c_uint
> + // SAFETY: `ptr` is a pointer to `Registration<T>` set in `Registration::new`
> + let registration = unsafe { &*(ptr as *const Registration<T>) };
... hence it's not correct to construct a reference to `Registration`
here, but yes, both `handler` and the `device` part of `inner` has been
properly initialized. So
let registration = ptr.cast::<Registration<T>>();
// SAFETY: The `data` part of `Devres` is `Opaque` and here we
// only access `.device()`, which has been properly initialized
// before `request_irq()`.
let device = unsafe { (*registration).inner.device() };
// SAFETY: The irq callback is removed before the device is
// unbound, so the fact that the irq callback is running implies
// that the device has not yet been unbound.
let device = unsafe { device.as_bound() };
// SAFETY: `.handler` has been properly initialized before
// `request_irq()`.
T::handle(unsafe { &(*registration).handler }, device) as c_uint
Thoughts? Similar for the threaded one.
Regards,
Boqun
> + // SAFETY: The irq callback is removed before the device is unbound, so the fact that the irq
> + // callback is running implies that the device has not yet been unbound.
> + let device = unsafe { registration.inner.device().as_bound() };
> +
> + T::handle(®istration.handler, device) as c_uint
> }
>
[...]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists