Hi David, Just a fly by comment on style, I don't have much to say content :) On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 06:40:50AM +0800, David Gow wrote: > At present, Rust in the kernel only supports 64-bit x86, so UML has > followed suit. However, it's significantly easier to support 32-bit i386 > on UML than on bare metal, as UML does not use the -mregparm option > (which alters the ABI), which is not yet supported by rustc[1]. > > Add support for CONFIG_RUST on um/i386, by adding a new target config to > generate_rust_target, and replacing various checks on CONFIG_X86_64 to > also probably like support CONFIG_X86_32. > > We still use generate_rust_target, rather than a built-in rustc target, > in oPrder to match x86_64, provide a future place for -mregparm, and more > easily disable floating point instructions. > > With these changes, the KUnit tests pass with: > kunit.py run --make_options LLVM=1 --kconfig_add CONFIG_RUST=y > --kconfig_add CONFIG_64BIT=n --kconfig_add CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE=n > > An earlier version of these changes was proposed on the Rust-for-Linux > github[2]. > > [1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116972 > [2]: https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/pull/966 > > Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@xxxxxxxxxx> ... > -ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 > +ifneq ($(or $(CONFIG_X86_64),$(CONFIG_X86_32)),) These configurations are mutually exclusive, so would it look more readable to have it be: ifeq ($(CONFIG_X86_32)$(CONFIG_X86_64),y) ? Cheers. Nathan
