netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Rust abstractions for network PHY drivers

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: Fri, 6 Oct 2023 19:37:15 -0400
From: Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>, miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com, 
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, greg@...ah.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Rust abstractions for network PHY drivers

On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 10:47 AM Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
> > So I think that merging the patchset through a single tree is easier;
> > netdev or rust.
> >
> > Miguel, how do you prefer to merge the patchset?
>
> What are the merge conflicts looking like? What has happened in the
> past? [...]

Miguel has said before that if subsystems are comfortable bringing
rust through their trees then they are welcome to do so, which helps
get a better idea of how everything works together. If you prefer not
to, it can come through rust-next with no problem.

There are no serious conflicts on the rust side since there is no net
module yet. I think that most new things will need to touch lib.rs and
the binding helper just to register themselves, but those are trivial
(e.g. same for wq updates coming [1]).

> Or is this the first driver to actually get this far towards
> being merged?
>
>       Andrew

I think that answer is yes :) at least for an actual leaf driver.
Hence some of the build system rough edges.

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/20230828104807.1581592-1-aliceryhl@google.com/