linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] net: phy: add Rust Rockchip PHY driver

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]

Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2024 22:29:45 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Christina Quast <contact@...istina-quast.de>,
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
	Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
	Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.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>,
	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>,
	Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] net: phy: add Rust Rockchip PHY driver

On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 10:23:03AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 07:07:00PM +0100, Christina Quast wrote:
> > This is the Rust implementation of drivers/net/phy/rockchip.c. The
> > features are equivalent. You can choose C or Rust version kernel
> > configuration.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Christina Quast <contact@...istina-quast.de>
> Cool, but why?  Is this going to happen for all phy drivers going
> forward?  What's the end-game here, dropping all .c phy drivers that are
> in rust?  Or having duplicates for all of them?

As one of the PHY Maintainers, i would say no.

Now we have an example, i think we should be a lot more strict about
what we actually merge. It should be a driver for hardware which does
not have a C driver.

We cannot drop C drivers since Rust at the moment does not support all
architectures GCC/Clang does. PHY drivers are architecture
independent, and in real life used on multiple architectures. When
Rust eventually catches up, we could consider dropping C drivers when
there is an equivalent Rust driver, but from what i hear, that is a
few years away. I don't want to be supporting a C and Rust driver for
the same hardware.

     Andrew