10/03/2025 17:25, Bruce Richardson: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 04:13:21PM +0000, Van Haaren, Harry wrote: > > Looking at the above parts of "Port abstraction in Rust", I'm not sure it > > really adds anything. > > It feels a bit "middle of the road" (aka, adding some "abstraction", but > > not going far enough). > > > > What if we took an even smaller step: remove the Rust struct concepts, and > > just call the "dpdk::raw::*" unsafe > > functions directly, as if they were C code. No "struct Port, impl Port", > > and no "Iterator<DpdkPort" concepts at all. > > That would show "correct" usage of the raw generated bindings, and provide > > raw API unit-tests. > > > > Yes, definite +1 for this. Let's not try and have a half-C, half-Rust set > of APIs, but instead let's have a clean low-level mapping directly to C > functions, and then build a proper, safe API on top of that.
+1 about limiting this patch to a low-level unsafe binding, while allowing a safe high-level API to be created later.
