Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] rust: workqueue: add creation of workqueues

[Alice Ryhl]

On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 06:59:31PM +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> On Thu Mar 12, 2026 at 10:23 AM CET, Alice Ryhl wrote:
> > +impl Queue {
> > +    /// Build a workqueue whose work may execute on any cpu.
> > +    ///
> > +    /// # Examples
> > +    ///
> > +    /// ```
> > +    /// use kernel::workqueue::Queue;
> > +    ///
> > +    /// let wq = Queue::new_unbound().build(c"my-wq")?;
> > +    /// wq.try_spawn(GFP_KERNEL, || pr_info!("Hello from unbound wq"))?;
> > +    /// # Ok::<(), Error>(())
> > +    /// ```
> > +    #[inline]
> > +    #[doc(alias = "WQ_UNBOUND")]
> > +    pub fn new_unbound() -> Builder<TypeUnbound> {
> 
> Wouldn't it be more straight forward if those where constructors of Builder?
> 
> 	let wq = wq::Builder::new_unbound().build(c"my-wq")?;

Crates out there do both, but I actually like this pattern quite a lot.
After all, given 'wq::Builder::new_unbound()' and 'Queue::new_unbound()'
I think the latter is the one that makes it more clear that you are
building a 'Queue'.

Also, it avoids an extra import.

> Queue::new_unbound() suggests that it returns a new Queue object, but instead it
> returns a new Builder object.

I'm only really concerned about confusion if it falls into one of these
categories:

* You write the wrong code, it compiles, and silently does the wrong
  thing.
* You read the code, and misunderstand what it does.

I don't think this falls into either of those cases. If you forget the
.build() call, all you get is a compiler error, and it's not hard to
figure out what to do when you see the error.

Alice