Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] rust: cpufreq: always inline functions using build_assert with arguments

Viresh Kumar
2025-12-15T05:06:58Z

On Mon, 08 Dec 2025 11:47:01 +0900
Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com> wrote:

> `build_assert` relies on the compiler to optimize out its error path.
> Functions using it with its arguments must thus always be inlined,
> otherwise the error path of `build_assert` might not be optimized out,
> triggering a build error.
>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Fixes: c6af9a1191d0 ("rust: cpufreq: Extend abstractions for driver registration")
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> Reviewed-by: Daniel Almeida <daniel.almeida@collabora.com>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com>
> ---
> rust/kernel/cpufreq.rs | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/rust/kernel/cpufreq.rs b/rust/kernel/cpufreq.rs
> index f968fbd22890..0879a79485f8 100644
> --- a/rust/kernel/cpufreq.rs
> +++ b/rust/kernel/cpufreq.rs
> @@ -1015,6 +1015,8 @@ impl<T: Driver> Registration<T> {
> ..pin_init::zeroed()
> };
>
> + // Always inline to optimize out error path of `build_assert`.
> + #[inline(always)]
> const fn copy_name(name: &'static CStr) -> [c_char; CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN] {
> let src = name.to_bytes_with_nul();
> let mut dst = [0; CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN];
>

> This change is not needed as this is a private function only used in
> const-eval only.
>
> I wonder if I should add another macro to assert that the function is
> only used in const eval instead? Do you think it might be useful to have
> something like:
>
> #[const_only]
> const fn foo() {}
>
> or
>
> const fn foo() {
> const_only!();
> }
>
> ? If so, I can send a patch that adds this feature.
>
> Implementation-wise, this will behave similar to build_error, where a
> function is going to be added that is never-linked but has a body for
> const eval.

I already applied this from V2, should I drop this change ?

--
viresh