On Wed Jul 9, 2025 at 10:56 AM CEST, Andreas Hindborg wrote: > "Benno Lossin" <lossin@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On Tue Jul 8, 2025 at 3:06 PM CEST, Andreas Hindborg wrote: >>> "Benno Lossin" <lossin@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>>> On Mon Jul 7, 2025 at 3:29 PM CEST, Andreas Hindborg wrote: >>>>> diff --git a/rust/kernel/sync.rs b/rust/kernel/sync.rs >>>>> index 81e3a806e57e2..13e6bc7fa87ac 100644 >>>>> --- a/rust/kernel/sync.rs >>>>> +++ b/rust/kernel/sync.rs >>>>> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ >>>>> mod locked_by; >>>>> pub mod poll; >>>>> pub mod rcu; >>>>> +mod set_once; >>>> >>>> I would have named this `once`. >>> >>> So module `once` and struct `SetOnce`? Struct name `Once` would lead >>> thoughts to `std::sync::Once`, which is a different thing. >> >> Hmm I thought that `Once` and `SetOnce` would live in the same module, >> but if they don't then I think it's better to keep the `set_once` >> module as-is. > > I guess they could live together. I was thinking a module for each. We > can always move it, the module name is not part of a public API. > > Let's go with `set_once` for now and we can change it later, if we > decide it is for the better? Sure. --- Cheers, Benno
