No idea what the CI is complaining about, tbh.
Is it because the variants are called Uint8, Uint16, etc.?

I'm still quite unsure about how we should handle this: *mut Self here, because a normal read may (depending on the device) change the PCI device's internal state just as much as a write.
Should we just make both take a mutable pointer?

No idea what the CI is complaining about, tbh.

Currently just a couple minor clippy things, add must_use and const: https://github.com/rust-osdev/uefi-rs/actions/runs/14888659415/job/41814946880?pr=1658

Should we just make both take a mutable pointer?

Yep, when in doubt let's go with *mut in uefi-raw.

Aight, when in doubt, *mut it out.
I made every method of which I think might change the device's state/memory in any way as *mut.

This is the error I don't really understand:

The error reporting of the check-raw step is rather poor, I agree. You can run cargo xtask check-raw locally (sources are in <repo>/xtask/src) and debug into to look up what's wrong; feel free to add an improvement to the error reporting as well

Ah sorry I missed that error. It's because you're using a Rust enum, which is not quite compatible with a C enum (because it's undefined behavior to create a Rust enum from an invalid value).

This can be fixed by using the newtype_enum macro.

(I put up #1660 to improve this error message.)

This can be fixed by using the newtype_enum macro.

Oof, that's embarrassing, the last merge request was only a few weeks ago and I've already forgotten about it.

I needed some iterations for the addressing stuff (PciIoAddress), but now I'm quite happy with it.