From: "Alexandre Courbot" <acourbot@nvidia.com>
To: "Gary Guo" <gary@garyguo.net>
Cc: "Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@kernel.org>,
"Abdiel Janulgue" <abdiel.janulgue@gmail.com>,
"Daniel Almeida" <daniel.almeida@collabora.com>,
"Robin Murphy" <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
"Andreas Hindborg" <a.hindborg@kernel.org>,
"Miguel Ojeda" <ojeda@kernel.org>,
"Boqun Feng" <boqun@kernel.org>,
"Björn Roy Baron" <bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com>,
"Benno Lossin" <lossin@kernel.org>,
"Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@google.com>,
"Trevor Gross" <tmgross@umich.edu>,
"David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
"Simona Vetter" <simona@ffwll.ch>,
driver-core@lists.linux.dev, rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] rust: ptr: add panicking index projection variant
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2026 20:22:20 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DI5LLN2V3XCS.34H4CG99N4MPA@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260415-projection-syntax-rework-v1-1-450723cb3727@garyguo.net>
On Thu Apr 16, 2026 at 4:57 AM JST, Gary Guo wrote:
> There have been a few cases where the programmer knows that the indices are
> in bounds but compiler cannot deduce that. This is also
> compiler-version-dependent, so using build indexing here can be
> problematic. On the other hand, it is also not ideal to use the fallible
> variant, as it adds error handling path that is never hit.
>
> Add a new panicking index projection for this scenario. Like all panicking
> operations, this should be used carefully only in cases where the user
> knows the index is going to be in bounds, and panicking would indicate
> something is catastrophically wrong.
>
> To signify this, require users to explicitly denote the type of index being
> used. The existing two types of index projections also gain the keyworded
> version, which will be the recommended way going forward.
>
> The keyworded syntax also paves the way of perhaps adding more flavors in
> the future, e.g. `unsafe` index projection. However, unless the code is
> extremely performance sensitive and bounds checking cannot be tolerated,
> panicking variant is safer and should be preferred, so it will be left to
> future when demand arises.
Review nit (no need to respin for this): this patch would probably be
easier to review if the renaming of `index` to `build_index` was split
into its own patch. It would reduce the diff, while also removing the
burden of having to keep in mind that `index` means a different thing
depending on whether the line is removed or added. I've found it a bit
difficult to keep track of this.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
> ---
> rust/kernel/dma.rs | 3 ++
> rust/kernel/ptr/projection.rs | 98 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> 2 files changed, 84 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/rust/kernel/dma.rs b/rust/kernel/dma.rs
> index 4995ee5dc689..3e4d44749aaf 100644
> --- a/rust/kernel/dma.rs
> +++ b/rust/kernel/dma.rs
> @@ -1207,6 +1207,9 @@ macro_rules! dma_write {
> (@parse [$dma:expr] [$($proj:tt)*] [.$field:tt $($rest:tt)*]) => {
> $crate::dma_write!(@parse [$dma] [$($proj)* .$field] [$($rest)*])
> };
> + (@parse [$dma:expr] [$($proj:tt)*] [[$flavor:ident: $index:expr] $($rest:tt)*]) => {
> + $crate::dma_write!(@parse [$dma] [$($proj)* [$flavor: $index]] [$($rest)*])
> + };
> (@parse [$dma:expr] [$($proj:tt)*] [[$index:expr]? $($rest:tt)*]) => {
> $crate::dma_write!(@parse [$dma] [$($proj)* [$index]?] [$($rest)*])
> };
> diff --git a/rust/kernel/ptr/projection.rs b/rust/kernel/ptr/projection.rs
> index 140ea8e21617..845811795393 100644
> --- a/rust/kernel/ptr/projection.rs
> +++ b/rust/kernel/ptr/projection.rs
> @@ -26,14 +26,14 @@ fn from(_: OutOfBound) -> Self {
> ///
> /// # Safety
> ///
> -/// The implementation of `index` and `get` (if [`Some`] is returned) must ensure that, if provided
> -/// input pointer `slice` and returned pointer `output`, then:
> +/// The implementation of `index`, `build_index` and `get` (if [`Some`] is returned) must ensure
> +/// that, if provided input pointer `slice` and returned pointer `output`, then:
> /// - `output` has the same provenance as `slice`;
> /// - `output.byte_offset_from(slice)` is between 0 to
> /// `KnownSize::size(slice) - KnownSize::size(output)`.
> ///
> -/// This means that if the input pointer is valid, then pointer returned by `get` or `index` is
> -/// also valid.
> +/// This means that if the input pointer is valid, then pointer returned by `get`, `index` or
> +/// `build_index` is also valid.
> #[diagnostic::on_unimplemented(message = "`{Self}` cannot be used to index `{T}`")]
> #[doc(hidden)]
> pub unsafe trait ProjectIndex<T: ?Sized>: Sized {
> @@ -42,9 +42,12 @@ pub unsafe trait ProjectIndex<T: ?Sized>: Sized {
> /// Returns an index-projected pointer, if in bounds.
> fn get(self, slice: *mut T) -> Option<*mut Self::Output>;
>
> + /// Returns an index-projected pointer; panic if out of bounds.
> + fn index(self, slice: *mut T) -> *mut Self::Output;
This looks like this could have a default implementation:
fn index(self, slice: *mut T) -> *mut Self::Output {
Self::get(self, slice).unwrap()
}
I'm sure there is a good reason for now having this though, so at least
for my education: why not? :)
In any case,
Reviewed-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-29 11:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-15 19:57 [PATCH 0/5] Rework index projection syntax Gary Guo
2026-04-15 19:57 ` [PATCH 1/5] rust: ptr: add panicking index projection variant Gary Guo
2026-04-16 7:07 ` Alice Ryhl
2026-04-27 11:24 ` Andreas Hindborg
2026-04-27 12:45 ` Gary Guo
2026-04-29 11:22 ` Alexandre Courbot [this message]
2026-04-29 11:29 ` Gary Guo
2026-04-30 11:23 ` Alexandre Courbot
2026-04-30 11:54 ` Gary Guo
2026-04-15 19:57 ` [PATCH 2/5] rust: dma: update to keyworded index projection syntax Gary Guo
2026-04-16 7:07 ` Alice Ryhl
2026-04-27 11:25 ` Andreas Hindborg
2026-04-29 11:22 ` Alexandre Courbot
2026-04-15 19:57 ` [PATCH 3/5] gpu: nova-core: convert to keyworded " Gary Guo
2026-04-16 7:08 ` Alice Ryhl
2026-04-29 11:22 ` Alexandre Courbot
2026-04-15 19:57 ` [PATCH 4/5] gpu: nova-core: use pointer projection for command queue code Gary Guo
2026-04-16 7:14 ` Alice Ryhl
2026-04-29 11:23 ` Alexandre Courbot
2026-04-15 19:57 ` [PATCH 5/5] rust: ptr: remove implicit index projection syntax Gary Guo
2026-04-16 7:14 ` Alice Ryhl
2026-04-27 11:28 ` Andreas Hindborg
2026-04-29 11:22 ` Alexandre Courbot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=DI5LLN2V3XCS.34H4CG99N4MPA@nvidia.com \
--to=acourbot@nvidia.com \
--cc=a.hindborg@kernel.org \
--cc=abdiel.janulgue@gmail.com \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=aliceryhl@google.com \
--cc=bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com \
--cc=boqun@kernel.org \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel.almeida@collabora.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=driver-core@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=gary@garyguo.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lossin@kernel.org \
--cc=nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
--cc=tmgross@umich.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox