Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] rust: build_assert: add instructions for use with function arguments

[Miguel Ojeda]

On Sun, Nov 30, 2025 at 11:01 PM John Hubbard <jhubbard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> It seems pretty clear that if one writes a *build* assertion about
> a function argument, then that is just conceptually wrong unless it
> is inlined. Because it can only really be a run-time assertion.
>
> This is what Alex pointed out, and looking at the code I agree.

No, the function here was already inline.

What Alexandre wrote, which is correct, is that the fix is about
asking for *more* inlining.

The build assertion itself is fine. What is "wrong" is that the
inlining wasn't enough.

Nevertheless, it is (or at least some of these are) definitely a "fix"
in the sense that it did fix cases we hit where the inlining wasn't
enough, like Clippy ones which may change codegen (which in turn is
why we say it cannot be used in "production" kernel builds:
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/8037 -- back then it
disabled MIR optimizations).

Cheers,
Miguel