netdev - Re: [net-next PATCH v10 7/7] rust: net::phy sync with match_phy

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <DA05GA6QUD1R.1XR0GFPLNXPTQ@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2025 14:51:55 +0200
From: "Benno Lossin" <lossin@...nel.org>
To: "FUJITA Tomonori" <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>
Cc: <ansuelsmth@...il.com>, <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
 <edumazet@...gle.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 <robh@...nel.org>, <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 <hkallweit1@...il.com>, <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
 <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>, <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
 <kabel@...nel.org>, <andrei.botila@....nxp.com>, <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
 <ojeda@...nel.org>, <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
 <gary@...yguo.net>, <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
 <a.hindborg@...nel.org>, <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, <dakr@...nel.org>,
 <sd@...asysnail.net>, <michael@...sekall.de>, <daniel@...rotopia.org>,
 <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v10 7/7] rust: net::phy sync with
 match_phy_device C changes

On Mon May 19, 2025 at 2:44 PM CEST, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> On Mon, 19 May 2025 14:32:44 +0200
> "Benno Lossin" <lossin@...nel.org> wrote:
>>>>> The other use case, as mentioned above, is when using the generic helper
>>>>> function inside match_phy_device() callback. For example, the 4th
>>>>> patch in this patchset adds genphy_match_phy_device():
>>>>>
>>>>> int genphy_match_phy_device(struct phy_device *phydev,
>>>>>                            const struct phy_driver *phydrv)
>>>>>
>>>>> We could add a wrapper for this function as phy::Device's method like
>>>>>
>>>>> impl Device {
>>>>>     ...
>>>>>     pub fn genphy_match_phy_device(&self, drv: &phy::DriverVTable) -> i32 
>>>> 
>>>> Not sure why this returns an `i32`, but we probably could have such a
>>>
>>> Maybe a bool would be more appropriate here because the C's comment
>>> says:
>>>
>>> Return: 1 if the PHY device matches the driver, 0 otherwise.
>>>
>>>> function as well (though I wouldn't use the vtable for that).
>>>
>>> What would you use instead?
>> 
>> The concept that I sketched above:
>> 
>>     impl Device {
>>         fn genphy_match_phy_device<T: Driver>(&self) -> bool {
>>             self.phy_id() == T::PHY_DEVICE_ID.id
>>         }
>>     }
>
> I think there might be a misunderstanding.
>
> Rust's genphy_match_phy_device() is supposed to be a wrapper for C's
> genphy_match_phy_device():
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/20250517201353.5137-5-ansuelsmth@gmail.com/

Oh yeah you're right. But using `DriverVTable` for that doesn't sound
nice...

---
Cheers,
Benno