Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:3;
Date:   Fri, 1 Dec 2023 10:04:42 -0500
From:   "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To:     Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Cc:     david.laight@aculab.com, a.hindborg@samsung.com,
        alex.gaynor@gmail.com, arve@android.com, benno.lossin@proton.me,
        bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com, boqun.feng@gmail.com, brauner@kernel.org,
        cmllamas@google.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, dxu@dxuuu.xyz,
        gary@garyguo.net, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
        joel@joelfernandes.org, keescook@chromium.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        maco@android.com, ojeda@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
        rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, surenb@google.com,
        tglx@linutronix.de, tkjos@android.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
        wedsonaf@gmail.com, willy@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] rust: file: add Rust abstraction for `struct file`
Message-ID: <20231201150442.GC509422@mit.edu>
References: <386bbdee165d47338bc451a04e788dd6@AcuMS.aculab.com>
 <20231201122740.2214259-1-aliceryhl@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20231201122740.2214259-1-aliceryhl@google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 12:27:40PM +0000, Alice Ryhl wrote:
> 
> You can import it with a use statement. For example:
> 
> use kernel::file::flags::O_RDONLY;
> // use as O_RDONLY

That's good to hear, but it still means that we have to use the XYZ_*
prefix, because otherwise, after something like

use kernel::file::flags::RDONLY;
use kernel::uapi::rwf::RDONLY;

that will blow up.  So that has to be

use kernel::file::flags::O_RDONLY;
use kernel::uapi::rwf::RWF_RDONLY;

Which is a bit more verbose, at least things won't blow up
spectacularly when you need to use both namespaces in the same
codepath.

Also note how we do things like this:

#define IOCB_APPEND          (__force int) RWF_APPEND

In other words, the IOCB_* namespace and the RWF_* namespace partially
share code points, and so they *have* to be assigned to the same value
--- and note that since RWF_APPEND is defined as part of the UAPI, it
might not even be the same across different architectures....

Cheers,

						- Ted