Nouveau - Dec 2025 - [PATCH v3] rust: clist: Add support to interface with C linked lists

On 12/1/25 8:51 AM, Daniel Almeida wrote:
>> On 29 Nov 2025, at 18:30, Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf at
nvidia.com> wrote:
...
>> +#[repr(transparent)]
>> +pub struct ClistHead(Opaque<bindings::list_head>);
> 
> I still think we should call this CList. IMHO, it does not make sense to
have a
I am guessing you meant to place this comment after Clist, rather than here
(after ClistHead)? Otherwise I don't know what you are actually suggesting?
> Clist, and a ClistHead (notice the capitalization). CList and CListHead are
> easier to read and reason about.
> 
> Did anyone push back on this?
 
If you are simply recommending renaming:
    Clist     --> CList
    ClistHead --> CListHead

...then I'd say "+1" for that suggestion.

thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard

On 12/1/2025 2:35 PM, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 12/1/25 8:51 AM, Daniel Almeida wrote:
>>> On 29 Nov 2025, at 18:30, Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf at
nvidia.com> wrote:
> ...
>>> +#[repr(transparent)]
>>> +pub struct ClistHead(Opaque<bindings::list_head>);
>>
>> I still think we should call this CList. IMHO, it does not make sense
to have a
> 
> I am guessing you meant to place this comment after Clist, rather than here
> (after ClistHead)? Otherwise I don't know what you are actually
suggesting?
> 
>> Clist, and a ClistHead (notice the capitalization). CList and CListHead
are
>> easier to read and reason about.
>>
>> Did anyone push back on this?
>  
> If you are simply recommending renaming:
>     Clist     --> CList
>     ClistHead --> CListHead
> 
> ...then I'd say "+1" for that suggestion.
I am not fond of the suggestion but I don't oppose it either. I honestly
don't
like the triple capitalization with CListHead though. Lets see where all of us
stand and then take a call on it. Opinions?

Thanks.

> On 1 Dec 2025, at 16:35, John Hubbard <jhubbard at nvidia.com> wrote:
> 
> On 12/1/25 8:51 AM, Daniel Almeida wrote:
>>> On 29 Nov 2025, at 18:30, Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf at
nvidia.com> wrote:
> ...
>>> +#[repr(transparent)]
>>> +pub struct ClistHead(Opaque<bindings::list_head>);
>> 
>> I still think we should call this CList. IMHO, it does not make sense
to have a
> 
> I am guessing you meant to place this comment after Clist, rather than here
> (after ClistHead)? Otherwise I don't know what you are actually
suggesting?
> 
>> Clist, and a ClistHead (notice the capitalization). CList and CListHead
are
>> easier to read and reason about.
>> 
>> Did anyone push back on this?
> 
> If you are simply recommending renaming:
>    Clist     --> CList
>    ClistHead --> CListHead
Yes, this is what I meant.
> 
> ...then I'd say "+1" for that suggestion.
> 
> thanks,
> -- 
> John Hubbard
> 
>