On 6/3/2025 4:12 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Tue Jun 3, 2025 at 12:15 AM JST, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 02, 2025 at 03:33:56PM +0200, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 03:45:11PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>>>> +impl Vbios {
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> + pub(crate) fn fwsec_header(&self, pdev: &device::Device) ->
>>>> Result<&FalconUCodeDescV3> {
>>>> + self.fwsec_image.fwsec_header(pdev)
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + pub(crate) fn fwsec_ucode(&self, pdev: &device::Device) ->
>>>> Result<&[u8]> {
>>>> + self.fwsec_image.fwsec_ucode(pdev, self.fwsec_header(pdev)?)
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + pub(crate) fn fwsec_sigs(&self, pdev: &device::Device) ->
>>>> Result<&[u8]> {
>>>> + self.fwsec_image.fwsec_sigs(pdev, self.fwsec_header(pdev)?)
>>>> + }
>>>
>>> Can't we just implement Deref here? Why do we need this indirection?
>>
>> We could, but it seems weird to deref a Vbios struct to an FwsecBiosImage
>> struct. Conceptually a Vbios is a collection of things and it could have
>> future extensions to its struct.
>
> Would it then make sense to make `FwSecBiosImage` public, add an `fn
> fwsec_image(&self) -> &FwSecBiosImage` method and have the caller call
> its methods directly (maybe renamed to `header`, `ucode` and `sigs`)?
Yeah, that seems better. Danilo, you're good with that idea too?
If yes, I can just do it that way (with suggestion attribution to Alex).
Thanks.
