[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <991d92dc-9b08-497e-bef1-dde7de2642a0@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 13:23:08 -0300
From: Martin Rodriguez Reboredo <yakoyoku@...il.com>
To: Matthew Maurer <mmaurer@...gle.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>,
Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/Kconfig: rust: Patchable function Rust compat
On 12/11/23 13:11, Matthew Maurer wrote:
> [...]
> Sorry, I just realized this was only in a local patch. I hadn't sent
> it previously because,
> as you pointed out, we currently only support one compiler revision.
>
> I was taking this approach because Android's compilers can have patches
> backported onto them when needed, so our 1.73.0 could have this flag
> and make use
> of it.
>>
>>
>> Speaking of which, I can't find the flag in upstream Rust (i.e.
>> outside the LLVM submodule), and I couldn't find a PR adding it. Could
>> you please add a `Link:` tag to the tracking issue / PR / ... if it is
>> submitted / when it is submitted? Or am I very confused?
> I haven't uploaded it yet. I'm hoping to send it up later today. I can
> wait until it's
> uploaded for a v2 of the patch series so I can link to it directly.
If you can send the patch then it'll be wonderful, no hurries though.
> [...]
>
> Re: Martin's comments (unfortunately they aren't on the same email so
> I can't reply inline)
> would you like me to file an issue against the R4L repository about
> this before sending a v2?
> I thought that repository was just for staging/discussion, and this
> didn't seem likely to need it.
>
About issues, commits or PRs I was referring to issues in
`rust-lang/rust`. When we use unstable compiler features in R4L they
get tracked in [1].
Link: https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/issues/355 [1]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists