Re: [PATCH] rust: irq: add support for request_irq()

[Boqun Feng]

On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 03:57:57PM -0300, Daniel Almeida wrote:
> 
> > 
> > It's not the pin_init! stuff, but the Opaque stuff. If it fails, then
> > it runs the destructor of Opaque<T>, which does *not* run the
> > destructor of T.
> > 
> > Alice
> 
> This is pretty unintuitive if you take into account trivial examples like
> 
> ```
> struct Foo(T)
> ```
> 
> Where dropping Foo drops T.
> 
> Is there any reason why dropping Opaque<T> doesn’t behave similarly?
> 

Because `Opaque` implies the value may not be initialized, it's similar
to `MaybeUninit`.

Do you really need the `Opaque` here? C code won't touch `handler` if
I'm not missing anything.

Regards,
Boqun

> — Daniel