On 6/28/25 10:57 PM, Rahul Rameshbabu wrote:
Device instances in the pci crate represent a valid struct pci_dev, not a struct
device.
Signed-off-by: Rahul Rameshbabu <sergeantsagara@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Notes:
Notes:
I noticed this while working on my HID abstraction work and figured it would be
a small fixup I could send afterwards.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/20250629045031.92358-2-sergeantsagara@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
rust/kernel/pci.rs | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/rust/kernel/pci.rs b/rust/kernel/pci.rs
index 6b94fd7a3ce9..af25a3fe92e5 100644
--- a/rust/kernel/pci.rs
+++ b/rust/kernel/pci.rs
@@ -254,7 +254,7 @@ pub trait Driver: Send {
///
/// # Invariants
///
-/// A [`Device`] instance represents a valid `struct device` created by the C portion of the kernel.
+/// A [`Device`] instance represents a valid `struct pci_dev` created by the C portion of the kernel.
Should this not just be a "a valid pci device" and let the type in the
function definition speak for the type instead of duplicating the type
name in the doc comment?
#[repr(transparent)]
pub struct Device<Ctx: device::DeviceContext = device::Normal>(
Opaque<bindings::pci_dev>,
--
You're more amazing than you think!
