this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2025
349 points (97.5% liked)

Open Source

32684 readers
879 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 74 points 1 day ago (25 children)

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/

Here’s the source thread.

Tldr: someone wants to put rust in the dma part of the kernel (the part that accesses memory directly)(it’s a memory allocator abstraction layer written in rust which rust code can use directly instead of dealing with the c allocator abstraction layer), is told that rust should use the extant methods to talk to the c dma interface, replies that doing so would make rust programs that talk to dma require some more code, gets told “that’s fine. We can’t do a split codebase”. The two parties work towards some resolution, then hector martin comes in and acts like jerk and gets told to fuck off by Linus.

Martin is no lennart poettering but I don’t try to see things from his perspective anymore.

It’s worth noting that Linus’ “approval” of rust in the kernel isn’t generally seen as a blanket endorsement, but a willingness to see how it might go and rust people have been generally trying to jam their code everywhere using methods that rival the cia simple field sabotage manual.

I don’t think it’s on purpose (except for maybe Martin) but a byproduct of the kernel maintainers moving slowly but surely and the rust developers moving much faster and some seeing the solution to that slow movement as jamming their foot in the door and wedging it open.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 day ago (13 children)

To be fair, I'm not sure how "I will do everything in my power to oppose this" is the anti-Rust side "work[ing] towards some resolution"...

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 day ago (3 children)

That’s tame for the kernel mailing list lol.

The context is that hellwig doesn’t want another maintainer or deal with a split codebase in the dma subsystem which I honestly agree with.

If I were a maintainer in that position I’d be barring the doors too. It’s not a driver for some esoteric realtek wireless card or something.

Even if I didn’t agree with that position it’s normal to only post on the kernel mailing list about shit you actually care deeply about because it’s public and aside from all your fellow devs taking the time to read what you wrote, psychotic nerds like myself watch it and will try to read the tea leaves too!

[–] FooBarrington 11 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

If I were a maintainer in that position I’d be barring the doors too. It’s not a driver for some esoteric realtek wireless card or something.

This effectively kills R4L. If they can't include Rust Interfaces for important subsystems, each driver written in Rust that uses these subsystems has to separately track all the Subsystem Interfaces, leading to lots of extra work for no benefit.

If this is the approach Linux takes, they should just cancel R4L completely.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)