Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Rust abstractions for network PHY drivers
From: Trevor Gross <tmgross@umich.edu>
Date: 2023-10-06 23:37:28
Also in:
rust-for-linux
From: Trevor Gross <tmgross@umich.edu>
Date: 2023-10-06 23:37:28
Also in:
rust-for-linux
On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 10:47 AM Andrew Lunn [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
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?
AndrewI 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/ (local)