[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGAB667vN1jR4UX4iw_sDHCMWLOfrbVKop-f7FXy7UTH_fpCuA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2026 22:13:00 +0900
From: 하승종 <engineer.jjhama@...il.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
Benno Lossin <lossin@...nel.org>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>,
Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/3] rust: tty: introduce TTY subsystem abstractions
and rttyprintk
2026년 1월 26일 (월) PM 9:48, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>님이 작성:
>
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 12:22:07PM +0000, SeungJong Ha via B4 Relay wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > This RFC patch series introduces Rust abstractions for the
> > TTY subsystem and implements a sample driver, rttyprintk.
> >
> > Currently, TTY abstractions are missing in the
> > Rust for Linux implementation. This series aims to fill that gap.
> >
> > It consists of two main parts:
> > - Rust TTY abstractions
>
> What type of new tty driver are you writing that you need these
> bindings? The need for new tty drivers is quite low based on the lack
> of new ones being added to the tree anymore. Are you sure you just
> don't want a serial port driver instead?
>
To answer your question directly: I do not have a plan to implement a specific
serial port driver at this moment.
My motivation for this patch series was simply to fill the missing TTY subsystem
gap in the Rust for Linux project. I believed that providing these abstractions
would be valuable as foundational infrastructure, enabling future developers to
write TTY-related drivers in Rust.
> > - The rttyprintk driver
> > rttyprintk serves as the first example of a Rust TTY driver.
> > I chose to port ttyprintk because its simplicity makes it and
> > ideal candidate for validating the new abstractions and demonstrating
> > their usage.
>
> I would want to see a real need for this before going any further. It's
> great that you created these bindings, but without a need, I don't see
> why this should even be reviewed.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
I understand your concern about adding code without a "real need" or an
active user in the tree.
If you believe that these abstractions are premature or unnecessary without
a concrete driver implementation to back them up, I fully accept that decision.
In that case, I am content with leaving this work as a reference implementation
for those who might be interested in the future.
Thanks,
SeungJong Ha
Powered by blists - more mailing lists