Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210414184604.23473-1-ojeda@kernel.org> <20210414184604.23473-5-ojeda@kernel.org>
 <YHmTWEAS/QjX++w4@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <CAHk-=wh_zb=K1B-N8mgHmSZDqTLgOm711NRXbTX_OwFAzDYg0Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANiq72nx7ngazsH7sZgc=HeU0cNj45F9+-rwQb7AkdYsRCmRbQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <YHnS92ZKZ4tRWTiA@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk> <CANiq72=RLf0FiuLVL-ZeLFp9P2LxTymbzhXoyQGG=tvUY_J-Sg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210416202215.GA11236@1wt.eu> <efe80452-fac9-247a-1e2b-a73553f605e8@redhat.com>
 <20210416205812.GA11655@1wt.eu>
In-Reply-To: <20210416205812.GA11655@1wt.eu>
From:   Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 16 Apr 2021 23:39:00 +0200
Message-ID: <CANiq72=5pMzSS5V7h-QcQvYgyZUwdE=T705KtBWrNYZPjMYK3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/13] Kbuild: Rust support
To:     Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Cc:     Connor Kuehl <ckuehl@redhat.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@gmail.com>,
        Geoffrey Thomas <geofft@ldpreload.com>,
        Finn Behrens <me@kloenk.de>,
        Adam Bratschi-Kaye <ark.email@gmail.com>,
        Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@google.com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 10:58 PM Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:
>
> No, two:
>   - ok in %rax (seems like it's "!ok" technically speaking since it
>     returns 1 on !ok and 0 on ok)
>   - foo_or_err in %rdx

Yes, but that is the implementation -- conceptually you only have one
or the other, and Rust won't allow you to use the wrong one.

> However then I'm bothered because Miguel's example showed that regardless
> of OK, EINVAL was always returned in foo_or_err, so maybe it's just
> because his example was not well chosen but it wasn't very visible from
> the source:

That is the optimizer being fancy since the error can be put
unconditionally in `rdx`.

If you compile:

    pub fn it_is_ok() -> KernelResult<Bar> {
        Ok(Bar)
    }

you will see it just clears `rax`.

Cheers,
Miguel