Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 5 Apr 2023 22:49:42 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@gmail.com>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
        Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@gmail.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>, Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>,
        =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn?= Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Wedson Almeida Filho <walmeida@microsoft.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/13] rust: lock: introduce `Mutex`
Message-ID: <20230405204942.GH365912@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20230405175111.5974-1-wedsonaf@gmail.com>
 <20230405175111.5974-3-wedsonaf@gmail.com>
 <2023040554-promoter-chevron-10b2@gregkh>
 <2023040509-tamer-clinic-c14c@gregkh>
 <20230405191826.GA365912@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <ZC3YWLmIick4jSSv@wedsonaf-dev>
 <20230405202932.GG365912@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <ZC3cxzpnrnXf/osU@wedsonaf-dev>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZC3cxzpnrnXf/osU@wedsonaf-dev>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 05:40:39PM -0300, Wedson Almeida Filho wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 10:29:32PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 05:21:44PM -0300, Wedson Almeida Filho wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 09:18:26PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 08:04:22PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 08:03:11PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 02:51:01PM -0300, Wedson Almeida Filho wrote:
> > > > > > > +void rust_helper_mutex_lock(struct mutex *lock)
> > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > +	mutex_lock(lock);
> > > > > > > +}
> > > > > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rust_helper_mutex_lock);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > No need to ever unlock a mutex?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Oh nevermind, mutex_lock() is a macro, mutex_unlock() is not...
> > > > 
> > > > Yeah, so I despise all these stupid helpers... but I suppose it's the
> > > > best they could come up with to interface the languages :/
> > > > 
> > > > The only hope is that the thing can do cross-language LTO or something
> > > > to re-inline stuff.
> > > 
> > > One thing we could to do improve the situation is to convert some of the
> > > existing macros into inline functions on the header files.
> > > 
> > > We can't do it for all cases (e.g., cases like mutex_init that declare a new
> > > static variable when lockdep is enabled) but mutex_lock is just a function
> > > when lockdep is disabled, and just calls mutex_lock_nested() when it is enabled.
> > > 
> > > How do you feel about this?
> > > 
> > > -#define mutex_lock(lock) mutex_lock_nested(lock, 0)
> > > +static inline void mutex_lock(struct mutex *lock)
> > > +{
> > > +       mutex_lock_nested(lock, 0);
> > > +}
> > 
> > Can rust actually parse C headers and inline C functions ? I thought the
> > whole problem was that it can only call C ABI symbols (which inline
> > functions are not).
> 
> Rust can't. We use a tool called bindgen to read C header files and generate
> equivalent Rust (extern "C") declarations for functions. The tool has been
> enhanced recently (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-bindgen/pull/2335) to
> handle static inline functions by automatically generating helpers like the one
> above (in addition to the Rust decls).

Oh man, that's sad, I was hoping it would write the equivalent inline
function in rust.

> So the situation is improved in that we don't need to manually write (and
> commit) the helpers. It may improve further in the future if we get better
> integration of the languages.

But yeah, feel free to convert macros to inline functions where the
difference is moot. There is indeed no real reason for mutex_lock() to
not be an inline function in that case.