linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 00/31] Rust support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CANiq72k7JKqq5-8Nqf3Q2r2t_sAffC8g86A+v8yBc=W-1--_Tg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 2 Aug 2022 15:45:50 +0200
From:   Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
        rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-um@...ts.infradead.org,
        live-patching@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 00/31] Rust support

Hi Willy,

On Tue, Aug 2, 2022 at 2:26 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> None of this (afaict) has been discussed on linux-fsdevel.  And I may
> have missed somethiing, but I don't see the fs module in this series
> of patches.  Could linux-fsdevel be cc'd on the development of Rust
> support for filesystems in the future?

In order to provide example drivers and kernel modules, we need to
have some safe abstractions for them, thus we are adding some as we
need them.

More importantly, the abstractions also serve as a showcase of how
they may be written in the future if Rust support is merged.

This does not mean these abstractions are a final design or that we
plan to develop them independently of subsystem maintainers. In fact,
we would prefer the opposite: in the future, when the support is
merged and more people start having more experience with Rust, we hope
that the respective kernel maintainers start developing and
maintaining the abstractions themselves.

But we have to start somewhere, and at least provide enough examples
to serve as guidance and to show that it is actually possible to write
abstractions that restrict the amount of unsafe code.

And, of course, if you are already interested in developing them, that
would be actually great and we would love your input and/or that you
join us.

As for the `fs` module, I see in lore 2 patches didn't make it
through, but I didn't get a bounce (I do get bounces for the
rust-for-linux ML, but I was told that was fine as long as LKML got
them). Sorry about that... I will ask what to do.

Meanwhile, you can see the patches in this branch:

    https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux.git rust-next

Cheers,
Miguel