From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCFC934BA34; Tue, 7 Oct 2025 13:16:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759843003; cv=none; b=f1uPDSSROMaaWD5Oh0gV7K8lgL9E2GVEoHjTe8pIYckmi6P69JUDWaROOxZ+of7f49ZbHnZYS36O9r5S0ztGqteB2I40wD8lC0Hh8QnoMD9iurHMUpe669b/Z4g/hD0x3pq1aT0TCLVFYyyXwxSMeBVNBZNupdWPpdTDzOemH0s= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759843003; c=relaxed/simple; bh=6UjzVlz1EtzKDtCcbFvNlSfCTmDJhScI63/zH3jvfVA=; h=Mime-Version:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:Subject:Cc:To:From: References:In-Reply-To; b=qoakepgld4I0c0uisGmUu/ap01Ucfe7L4mTrdRWTCqSSFbzKl7HoAnMu2W+IjbeTFpC+21dioo+IMawhBqyMrejbqQBJHkMKSKQNuAPyZuz7vfOFthi9OUrf+4naqLozn3xIYyn6v6qIBumD7pKmMZWbgxMPnnlnZdGsvikith4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=DhEl/zG+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="DhEl/zG+" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0EB19C4CEF1; Tue, 7 Oct 2025 13:16:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1759843003; bh=6UjzVlz1EtzKDtCcbFvNlSfCTmDJhScI63/zH3jvfVA=; h=Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=DhEl/zG+D7xFgqiPWQVAdl3fHwTnoe02BBj4mm/Hut3L3AvLtiropA6iQKNKR9ihj PrDT+saQAFcMRAX90RlVlIsHlT5aSWD0Jun9zUaMYd1q0lm11iY0q4xTAH5bxq4BzW Imdfn0O0PVR1fezkl+US2ZbE2qKJrPd/JvACcmAJ1AWQ/bYAqYbptM3BiMKz9A/Pjz PJJVjtZ2YgwVK6RnK+i2UHpCyuoGHIuHRXM+fGJdFvf5pO/XqgZPh524KbGltDXMkm CsvbFYPZOYFlGn0tc6e7yh9a/XT4R/XE4NsqkLutt3X0cyrbsD5Uz8knxfBlMfKmMZ 5QT6K/RWDIkbw== Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2025 15:16:36 +0200 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/5] Introduce bitfield and move register macro to rust/kernel/ Cc: , , , "Alistair Popple" , "Miguel Ojeda" , "Alex Gaynor" , "Boqun Feng" , "Gary Guo" , , "Benno Lossin" , "Andreas Hindborg" , "Alice Ryhl" , "Trevor Gross" , "David Airlie" , "Simona Vetter" , "Maarten Lankhorst" , "Maxime Ripard" , "Thomas Zimmermann" , "John Hubbard" , "Timur Tabi" , , "Elle Rhumsaa" , "Daniel Almeida" , "Andrea Righi" , To: "Alexandre Courbot" , "Yury Norov" , "Joel Fernandes" From: "Danilo Krummrich" References: <20251003154748.1687160-1-joelagnelf@nvidia.com> In-Reply-To: On Tue Oct 7, 2025 at 12:36 PM CEST, Alexandre Courbot wrote: > Because letting it fully mature within nova-core also has the drawback > that we might miss the perspective of other potential users, which may > make us draw ourselves into a corner that will make the macro less > useful generally speaking. We are at a stage where we can still make > design changes if needed, but we need to hear from other users, and > these won't come as long as the macro is in nova-core. There are two different things here that are getting mixed up a bit. (1) Moving the register!() code out of nova-core to make it accessible fo= r other drivers. (2) Generalize the bitfield implementation that so far is baked into the register!() code. Both of those make sense, but they don't have to happen at the same time necessarily. Now, I'm not saying that we necessarily have to change the approach here. T= he current merge window isn't even closed, so we have plently of time left, i.= e. there's no rush with with patch series. However, if it helps, I'm perfectly fine to take the register!() implementa= tion into the I/O entry in a first step and in a second step generalize the bitf= ield implementation and move it out of the register!() code. Again, there's no rush as far as I'm concerned, yet the latter approach mig= ht add a bit more structure and hence run a bit smoother. - Danilo