[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250929203244.GA3053897@joelbox2>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2025 16:32:44 -0400
From: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@...dia.com>
To: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, dakr@...nel.org,
Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
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>,
David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>, Timur Tabi <ttabi@...dia.com>,
joel@...lfernandes.org, Elle Rhumsaa <elle@...thered-steel.dev>,
Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>,
Daniel Almeida <daniel.almeida@...labora.com>,
nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] rust: bitfield: Use 'as' operator for setter type
conversion
On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 03:47:08PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Sun Sep 21, 2025 at 3:22 AM JST, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > The bitfield macro's setter currently uses the From trait for type
> > conversion, which is overly restrictive and prevents use cases such as
> > narrowing conversions (e.g., u32 storage size to u8 field size) which
> > aren't supported by From.
> >
> > Replace 'from' with 'as' in the setter implementation to support this.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
>
> Can you add a `Link: ` tag to the discussion for context?
>
> But I am not really convinced this is needed or desirable at all. Where
> would it make sense to define a field that is larger that its containing
> type?
The 'as' keyword is not related to the containing struct IMO.
Example:
you can have a
struct Foo(u8) {
0:3 foo as u8;
4:7 bar as u8;
}
Here if you just go by the 'as u8', the total width would be 16. So we should
not conflate the 'as u8' with the '(u8)', they are already 2 separate things
and incompatible. I think the following would also work:
0:3 foo as u8 => u32;
However, directly using 'as u32' is a better shortcut IMO.
Would it help if I added more documentation comments about this?
> This looks like it can introduce confusion or errors. It's already
> not ideal that we can pass values that would be truncated; but this
> makes it worse.
Actually, in new series we're no longer truncating, I will post that shortly
after we conclude feedback on this series.
>
> Anyway, if we decide to keep this, I think you want to remove the
>
> +//! Note that the compiler will error out if the size of the setter's
> arg exceeds the
> +//! struct's storage size.
>
> bit that was introduced in patch 2.
Ah, good catch! Will remove the comment.
thanks,
- Joel
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists