netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v10 1/4] rust: core 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <67da9a6a-b0eb-470c-ae43-65cf313051b3@lunn.ch>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2023 11:24:03 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>, alice@...l.io,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
	tmgross@...ch.edu, miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com,
	benno.lossin@...ton.me, wedsonaf@...il.com, aliceryhl@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v10 1/4] rust: core abstractions for network PHY
 drivers

> > The C side people read the Rust code before changing the C code? Let's
> > see. 
> > 
> 
> Hmm... I usually won't call someone "C side people". I mean, the project
> has C part and Rust part, but the community is one.
> 
> In case of myself, I write both C and Rust, if I'm going to change some
> C side function, I may want to see the usage at Rust side, especially
> whether my changes could break the safety, and safety comments may be
> important.

While i agree with your sentiment, ideally we want bilingual
developers, in reality that is not going to happen for a long time. I
could be wrong, but i expect developers to be either C developers, or
Rust developers. They are existing kernel developers who know C, or
Rust developers who are new to the kernel, and may not know much C. So
we should try to keep that in mind.

I personally don't think i have enough Rust knowledge to of even
reached the dangerous stage. But at least the hard part with Rust
seems to be the comments, not the actual code :-(

	Andrew