Re: [PATCH V6 02/15] cpufreq: Add cpufreq_table_len()

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 10:11:17AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 08-01-25, 12:50, Greg KH wrote:
> > Odd, why can't Rust also know where CPUFREQ_TABLE_END is?  Why do you
> > have to do extra work here?  That feels wrong.
> 
> Well, it can, sure.
> 
> The freq table the Rust code receives is part of the C code:
> bindings::cpufreq_frequency_table. Since it is a C managed pointer, I thought it
> is better to do the parsing in C code itself. In case the implementation of the
> struct changes in future (unlikely though), we would only need to fix the C code
> and not Rust, which looks to be the right expectation.

Then why not make the C code use this function as well, to keep all
cpufreq drivers from having to manually walk the list and that way both
C and Rust drivers all do the same thing?  That makes more sense to me,
there's no reason you can't change C code today first to make things
more unified, in fact, that's usually a better idea overall anyway.

thanks,

greg k-h