Committing to Rust for kernel code

Posted Nov 27, 2023 16:26 UTC (Mon) by ojeda (subscriber, #143370)
In reply to: Committing to Rust for kernel code by Conan_Kudo
Parent article: Committing to Rust for kernel code

> Your approach with RfL is mostly fine,

As I told you both here and in Zulip, please explain what is your proposal for improvement. If you do not have one, please do not assume or imply that things could be done better.

The Rust versions we pick may not be the best for you (in fact, they are already the best ones we can pick for you), but that does not mean Rust for Linux is governed or developed in a bad way given the current constraints.

> it's just we're not at a place where I would be comfortable recommending it to be enabled in a mainline distro kernel.

Like I told you in Zulip, I am not sure why this is relevant. Whatever you recommend does not change our constraints.

I also already told you that we ourselves tell general purpose distributions that it is early to enable the upstream Rust support.

> The forked alloc crate issue has to be resolved first.

No, the reason is not alloc. The fact that you say so concerns me, since that is an implementation detail for users.

The actual reasons are, for instance, that there are no users in-tree, MODVERSIONS, etc.