Re: [PATCH 04/13] Kbuild: Rust support

[Miguel Ojeda]

On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 8:10 PM Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> How well would ? operator fit that pattern?  _If_ it's just a syntax sugar
> along the lines of "if argument matches Err(_), return Err(_)", the types
> shouldn't be an issue, but that might need some fun with releasing resources,
> etc.  If it's something more elaborate... details, please.

Yes, it is just syntax sugar -- it doesn't introduce any power to the language.

It was introduced because it is a very common pattern when using the
`Result` and `Option` enums. In fact, before it existed, it was just a
simple macro that you could also implement yourself.

For instance, given `Foo` and `Bar` types that need RAII cleanup of
some kind (let's say `kill_foo()` and `kill_bar()`):

    fn foo() -> KernelResult<Foo> {
        if black_box() {
            return Err(EINVAL);
        }

        // something that gets you a `Foo`
        let foo = ...;

        Ok(foo)
    }

    fn bar() -> KernelResult<Bar> {
        let p = foo()?;

        // something that gets you a `Bar`, possibly using the `p`
        let bar = ...;

        Ok(bar)
    }

This reduces to (full example at https://godbolt.org/z/hjTxd3oP1):

    bar:
            push    rbx
            mov     ebx, 1
            call    qword ptr [rip + black_box@GOTPCREL]
            test    al, al
            jne     .LBB2_2
            call    qword ptr [rip + kill_foo@GOTPCREL]
            xor     ebx, ebx
    .LBB2_2:
            mov     eax, ebx
            mov     edx, -1234
            pop     rbx
            ret

You can see `bar()` calls `black_box()`. If it failed, it returns the
EINVAL. Otherwise, it cleans up the `foo` automatically and returns
the successful `bar`.

Cheers,
Miguel