Nouveau - Nov 2025 - [PATCH 7/7] nova-core: mm: Add data structures for page table management

On 10/20/25 2:30 PM, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> Hi Joel,
> 
> A few nits below (I do sometimes this kind of docs review to try to
> keep a consistent style across all Rust code).
> 
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 8:56?PM Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf at
nvidia.com> wrote:
>>
>> +//!     .set_table_frame_number(new_table.frame_number());
>> +//! // Call a function to write PDE to VRAM address
> 
> Newline between these. Period ad the end.
> 
Hi Miguel,

As Joel also was hinting at, is there any easy way to get this sort
of thing automatically checked? This is what scripts/checkpatch.pl
helps us out with on the C side, and maybe it is also the right
tool for Rust...?

It's sad to have a patchset pass both checkpatch.pl, and CLIPPY=1 
builds, and yet still be full of typography and convention 
violations.


thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard

On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 8:29?PM John Hubbard <jhubbard at nvidia.com>
wrote:
>
> As Joel also was hinting at, is there any easy way to get this sort
> of thing automatically checked? This is what scripts/checkpatch.pl
> helps us out with on the C side, and maybe it is also the right
> tool for Rust...?
We have a few patches for that script (including for at least one of
the things above), but lately I have been thinking we may want to have
a different script or tools, ideally written in Rust, to encourage
contributions and reviews and tests and so on.

Moreover, for some of the cases above it is better to put it into
other tooling like `rustdoc`, Clippy, `rustfmt` or even klint,
depending on what it is -- over time I have opened quite a few
suggestions and some were implemented and work great, see e.g.

    https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/issues/349

If someone wants to help with some of that, of course, please ping me!

I also had a bot I wrote back then when we used GitHub, with quite a
few checks (especially around development process for newcomers to the
kernel, e.g. using the right SoB and tags etc.) which people seemed to
appreciate (to the point of someone mentioning it in a talk... :).

A long time ago I asked about making the bot send messages to the
mailing list when we migrated, but it wasn't OK'd back then. I can try
again, or perhaps it would make sense to make it send messages in
private.

Finally, nowadays, I imagine an LLM could do a reasonable job for some
of these as well, if there is available AI time somewhere (please see
my reply to Joel on that too).

Cheers,
Miguel

On 11/4/25 9:56 AM, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 8:29?PM John Hubbard <jhubbard at nvidia.com>
wrote:
>>
>> As Joel also was hinting at, is there any easy way to get this sort
>> of thing automatically checked? This is what scripts/checkpatch.pl
>> helps us out with on the C side, and maybe it is also the right
>> tool for Rust...?
> 
> We have a few patches for that script (including for at least one of
> the things above), but lately I have been thinking we may want to have
> a different script or tools, ideally written in Rust, to encourage
> contributions and reviews and tests and so on.
> 
> Moreover, for some of the cases above it is better to put it into
> other tooling like `rustdoc`, Clippy, `rustfmt` or even klint,
rustfmt sounds like a nice user experience: fixing things up
upon file save then becomes possible.
> depending on what it is -- over time I have opened quite a few
> suggestions and some were implemented and work great, see e.g.
> 
>     https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/issues/349
> 
> If someone wants to help with some of that, of course, please ping me!
> 
> I also had a bot I wrote back then when we used GitHub, with quite a
> few checks (especially around development process for newcomers to the
> kernel, e.g. using the right SoB and tags etc.) which people seemed to
> appreciate (to the point of someone mentioning it in a talk... :).
> 
> A long time ago I asked about making the bot send messages to the
> mailing list when we migrated, but it wasn't OK'd back then. I can
try
I'm grateful for that. I think tooling provides a much happier
work environment: you can run the tools locally (and we can put
than in a submitters-checklist.rst), as opposed to getting an
email after posting.
> again, or perhaps it would make sense to make it send messages in
> private.
> 
> Finally, nowadays, I imagine an LLM could do a reasonable job for some
> of these as well, if there is available AI time somewhere (please see
> my reply to Joel on that too).
Very true. I saw that. Yes, once we know what the AI should be
reading for instructions, could help spot issues.


thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard