On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 5:28 PM Alice Ryhl wrote:
>
> Since commit b20fbbc08a36 ("rust: check type of `$ptr` in
> `container_of!`") we have enforced that the field pointer passed to
> container_of! must match the declared field. This caused mismatches when
> using a pointer to bindings::x for fiel
On Tue Jun 24, 2025 at 5:27 PM CEST, Alice Ryhl wrote:
> Since commit b20fbbc08a36 ("rust: check type of `$ptr` in
> `container_of!`") we have enforced that the field pointer passed to
> container_of! must match the declared field. This caused mismatches when
> using a pointer to bindings::x for fi
"Alice Ryhl" writes:
> Since commit b20fbbc08a36 ("rust: check type of `$ptr` in
> `container_of!`") we have enforced that the field pointer passed to
> container_of! must match the declared field. This caused mismatches when
> using a pointer to bindings::x for fields of type Opaque.
>
> This si
On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 03:27:54PM +, Alice Ryhl wrote:
> Since commit b20fbbc08a36 ("rust: check type of `$ptr` in
> `container_of!`") we have enforced that the field pointer passed to
> container_of! must match the declared field. This caused mismatches when
> using a pointer to bindings::x f
On 6/24/25 5:27 PM, Alice Ryhl wrote:
Since commit b20fbbc08a36 ("rust: check type of `$ptr` in
`container_of!`") we have enforced that the field pointer passed to
container_of! must match the declared field. This caused mismatches when
using a pointer to bindings::x for fields of type Opaque.
T
