[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZfHu48NGktOx_uhG@boqun-archlinux>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 11:22:27 -0700
From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
Cc: Andreas Hindborg <nmi@...aspace.dk>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>,
Damien Le Moal <Damien.LeMoal@....com>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>,
Niklas Cassel <Niklas.Cassel@....com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>, Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@...dia.com>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
Yexuan Yang <1182282462@...t.edu.cn>,
Sergio González Collado <sergio.collado@...il.com>,
Joel Granados <j.granados@...sung.com>,
"Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)" <kernel@...kajraghav.com>,
Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...sung.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org" <rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>,
"lsf-pc@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <lsf-pc@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"gost.dev@...sung.com" <gost.dev@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Rust block device driver API and null block
driver
On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 11:02:23AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 3/13/24 04:05, Andreas Hindborg wrote:
> > This is the second version of the Rust block device driver API and the Rust null
> > block driver. The context and motivation can be seen in cover letter of the RFC
> > v1 [1]. If more context is required, a talk about this effort was recorded at
> > LPC [2]. I hope to be able to discuss this series at LSF this year [3].
>
> Memory safety may land in C++ in the near future (see also
> https://herbsutter.com/2024/03/). If memory-safe C++ or memory-safe C
> would be adopted in the kernel, it would allow writing memory-safe
> drivers without having to add complicated bindings between existing C
I honestly doubt it, memory-safe is not free, basically you will still
want unsafe part for the performance reason (or interacting with
hardware), and provide a safe API for driver development. I don't think
that part will be gone with a memory-safe C++. So the complication still
exists. But I'm happy to be proved wrong ;-)
Regards,
Boqun
> code and new Rust code. Please do not take this as personal criticism -
> I appreciate the effort that has been spent on coming up with great
> Rust bindings for the Linux kernel block layer.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists