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:   Thu, 20 Jul 2023 13:25:40 +0000
In-Reply-To: <20230719141918.543938-7-benno.lossin@proton.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
References: <20230719141918.543938-7-benno.lossin@proton.me>
Message-ID: <20230720132540.3543838-1-aliceryhl@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/12] rust: init: add `..Zeroable::zeroed()` syntax
 for zeroing all missing fields
From:   Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
To:     benno.lossin@proton.me
Cc:     alex.gaynor@gmail.com, aliceryhl@google.com,
        bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com, boqun.feng@gmail.com, gary@garyguo.net,
        lina@asahilina.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nmi@metaspace.dk,
        ojeda@kernel.org, rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org,
        wedsonaf@gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Precedence: bulk

Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@proton.me> writes:
> Add the struct update syntax to the init macros, but only for
> `..Zeroable::zeroed()`. Adding this at the end of the struct initializer
> allows one to omit fields from the initializer, these fields will be
> initialized with 0x00 set to every byte. Only types that implement the
> `Zeroable` trait can utilize this.
> 
> Suggested-by: Asahi Lina <lina@asahilina.net>
> Signed-off-by: Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@proton.me>

Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>

> +    (make_initializer:
> +        @slot($slot:ident),
> +        @type_name($t:ident),
> +        @munch_fields(..Zeroable::zeroed() $(,)?),
> +        @acc($($acc:tt)*),
> +    ) => {
> +        // Endpoint, nothing more to munch, create the initializer. Since the users specified
> +        // `..Zeroable::zeroed()`, the slot will already have been zeroed and all field that have
> +        // not been overwritten are thus zero and initialized. We still check that all fields are
> +        // actually accessible by using the struct update syntax ourselves.
> +        // Since we are in the `if false` branch, this will never get executed. We abuse `slot` to
> +        // get the correct type inference here:

Didn't you just change it to a closure rather than an `if else`?

Regardless, I'm happy with this change.

Alice