Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] rust: add parameter support to the `module!` macro

[Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@kernel.org>]

Hi Miguel,

"Miguel Ojeda" <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com> writes:

> On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 12:33 PM Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> +#![feature(sync_unsafe_cell)]
>
> Please mention this in the commit message, the status of the feature
> and justify the addition.

I forgot, thanks for pointing that out. Following the discussion of v2
of this series I can understand that `mut static` is discouraged and
scheduled for removal. Interior mutability via `SyncUnsafeCell` provides
the same functionality and it is my understanding that this feature is
on track to be stabilized.

>
>> +//! C header: [`include/linux/moduleparam.h`](../../../include/linux/moduleparam.h)
>
> Please use `srctree`.

Ok.

>
>> +/// Newtype to make `bindings::kernel_param` `Sync`.
>
> Please add intra-doc links where applicable, e.g. `Sync` here.

Will do.

>
>> +unsafe extern "C" fn set_param<T>(
>> +    val: *const core::ffi::c_char,
>> +    param: *const crate::bindings::kernel_param,
>> +) -> core::ffi::c_int
>> +where
>> +    T: ModuleParam,
>> +{
>> +    // NOTE: If we start supporting arguments without values, val _is_ allowed
>> +    // to be null here.
>> +    assert!(!val.is_null());
>
> Should this return an error instead?

Not sure. `val` being null not supposed to happen in the current
configuration. It should be an unreachable state. So BUG is the right thing?

>
>> +/// Write a string representation of the current parameter value to `buf`.
>> +///
>> +/// # Safety
>> +///
>> +/// Must not be called.
>> +///
>> +/// # Note
>> +///
>> +/// This should not be called as we declare all parameters as read only.
>> +#[allow(clippy::extra_unused_type_parameters)]
>> +unsafe extern "C" fn get_param<T>(
>> +    _buf: *mut core::ffi::c_char,
>> +    _param: *const crate::bindings::kernel_param,
>> +) -> core::ffi::c_int
>> +where
>> +    T: ModuleParam,
>> +{
>> +    unreachable!("Parameters are not readable");
>> +}
>
> Do we need this? Can't the `ops` callback be `null`?

Not in the current configuration. The parameters can only be declared
"read only". It should be impossible for anyone to call this function.

>
>> +/// The `arg` field of `param` must be an initialized instance of `Self`.
>
> `Self`?

That whole line is wrong, thanks for spotting. It should read "`arg` must
be an initialized instance of `T`. This function takes ownership of
the `T` pointed to by `arg`.".

>
>> +/// Generate a static [`kernel_param_ops`](../../../include/linux/moduleparam.h) struct.
>
> `srctree`.

👍

>
>> +/// Parse a token stream of the form `expected_name: "value",` and return the
>> +/// string in the position of "value". Panics on parse error.
>
> `# Panics` section.

Ok.

>
>> +/// `type` may be one of
>> +///
>> +/// - `i8`
>> +/// - `u8`
>> +/// - `i8`
>> +/// - `u8`
>> +/// - `i16`
>> +/// - `u16`
>> +/// - `i32`
>> +/// - `u32`
>> +/// - `i64`
>> +/// - `u64`
>> +/// - `isize`
>> +/// - `usize`
>
> Can these be intra-doc links?

Yes!


Thanks for the comments!



Best regards,
Andreas Hindborg