[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aYUB4VcsSDyQxSt1@tardis.local>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2026 12:47:29 -0800
From: Boqun Feng <boqun@...nel.org>
To: Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
Todd Kjos <tkjos@...roid.com>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@...gle.com>, Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
Benno Lossin <lossin@...nel.org>,
Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>,
Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>, Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@...nel.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@...dia.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>, Zqiang <qiang.zhang@...ux.dev>,
FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>,
Lyude Paul <lyude@...hat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...nel.org>,
Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
"Yury Norov (NVIDIA)" <yury.norov@...il.com>,
Vitaly Wool <vitaly.wool@...sulko.se>,
Tamir Duberstein <tamird@...nel.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Daniel Almeida <daniel.almeida@...labora.com>,
Mitchell Levy <levymitchell0@...il.com>, David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>,
Peter Novak <seimun018r@...il.com>,
José Expósito <jose.exposito89@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] Introduce HasField infrastructure
On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 02:20:09PM +0000, Gary Guo wrote:
> On Wed Jan 28, 2026 at 9:53 PM GMT, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > Currently we have a few similar places where we use a `Has*` trait to
> > describe that a data structure has some types of field in it so that the
> > containing type can do something with it. There are also a `impl_has_*!`
> > macro to help implement the trait. While it's working, but it's less
> > ergonomic to me, especially considering the amount of the work we need
> > to do for something new (e.g. rcu_head).
> >
> > Therefore here is the effort to unify them into a proc-macro based
> > solution. `Field` and `HasField` traits are introduced to generify the
> > "Has A" relationship, and a derive macro `#[derive(HasField)]` is also
> > added to support automatically implementing `HasField` trait.
> >
> > This series convert a few users (Work, HrTimer) and introduce a new
> > `Field` type `RcuHead`. These improvements demonstrate how this
> > infrastructure can be used.
> >
> > Some future work is still needed: using `HasField` for `DelayedWork` and
> > `ListLink` is still missing. Also it's possible to clean up `HasWork`
> > trait as well.
> >
> > One known issue is that `#[derive(HasField)]` doesn't play alone with
> > `#[pin_data]` at the moment, for example:
> >
> > #[derive(HasField)]
> > #[pin_data]
> > struct Foo { .. }
> >
> > works, but
> >
> > #[pin_data]
> > #[derive(HasField)]
> > struct Foo { .. }
> >
> > doesn't. Maybe it's by design or maybe something could be improved by
> > pin-init.
> >
> >
> > The patchset is based on today's rust/rust-next, top commit is:
> >
> > a7c013f77953 ('Merge patch series "refactor Rust proc macros with `syn`"')
> >
> > Regards,
> > Boqun
>
> Hi Boqun,
>
> Thanks for working on this.
>
> You currently divide things into two traits, `Field<T>` which doesn't seem to be
> doing anything (actually, why does this need to exist at all?) and
> `HasField<T, F>` which defines all the field projection.
>
Oh, you're right, I don't need `Field<T>` right now. In a certain point,
it was used to constrain all "field types" must be generic over their
container type. But it's not the case now (see RcuHead).
> For some prior art that attempts to have fields, e.g. my field-projection
> experiemnt crate
>
> https://docs.rs/field-projection
>
> and Benno's work on field-representing-types in the Rust language, we opt to
> have a type to represent each field instead.
>
> I think we should have a unified projection infrastructure in the kernel, for
> both intrusive data structure and I/O projection and others, so I think it's
> useful to have types representing fields (and projection in general, this could
> also extend to the `register!` macro). For clarity, let me refer to this as
> `field_of!(Base, foo)` and the trait is `Projection`.
>
Yep, I actually have an example PR integrating that into workqueue:
https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/field-projection/pull/2
(of course `Work` in that case should be generic over the containing
type, but that's easy to fix)
I guess the next question is: will you and Benno be willing to port
field-projection into kernel source (and keep it aligned with the
language feature), so we can switch to that?
Regards,
Boqun
> With this infra, the `HasField` trait would simply looks like this:
>
> trait HasField<Base, FieldType> {
> type Field: Projection<Base = Base, Type = FieldType>;
> }
>
> and the macro derive would generate something like
>
> impl HasField<MyStruct, Work<MyStruct>> {
> type Field = field_of!(MyStruct, name_of_work_field);
> }
>
> Best,
> Gary
>
[..]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists