Hello! some nits about the patch body On Wed Oct 7, 2026 at 6:17 PM -03, spidermana wrote: > `declare_drm_ioctls!` generates an `unsafe extern "C" fn` per ioctl. Inside > it, four unsafe operations are performed, while the call to > `Device::from_raw()` relies on the enclosing > `unsafe fn` body instead. > > Both forms are legal, but the kernel builds all Rust code with > `-Dunsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn`, which asks for the explicit block. > The lint does not fire here because the macro is defined in the `kernel` > crate and expanded in the > driver crates, and rustc suppresses lints for code coming from another > crate's macro. > > The patch is to wrap the call in an unsafe block, keeping the existing SAFETY > comment. No functional change.
The lines in the message are usually wrapped at column 75 [1]. One thing I do is writing it in vim and if I see that the paragraph exceeds the limit, I put the cursor over it and type in normal mode gqip. This auto-wrapps it. > > Signed-off-by: spidermana <[email protected]> Normally, a full legal name is used for signing patches [2]. If you are going to re-send the patch and nothing changes, you can use [PATCH RESEND] tag. Hope that helps! Regards, Nicolás [1] https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html#the-canonical-patch-format [2] https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html#sign-your-work-the-developer-s-certificate-of-origin
