Conversation

Jarkko Sakkinen

Edited 2 months ago
Two years of being in the mainline is a short durationin kernel. Some feature patch sets take longer. For most part I'm wondering why people go crazy of not much happening on Rust side.

More patch sets like this are best possible effort for Rust enablement (and BTW, it is in C ;-) ):

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240815173903.4172139-21-samitolvanen@google.com/

Once GCC-Rust catches up I'd expect more to happen as that will unlock for instance embedded toolchains and give at least theoretical chance to have something with Rust in a defconfig.

I'd contribute and/or wait another 3-5 years before making any fast conclusions. Linux is no worse in this than any other operating system, which decades of legacy to worry about. There is no unfortunately fast path here anywhere.
2
1
2
In any project, not just open source, more robust you can get the builds, more useful developments will foster from that. It is factors more important than any specific feature.
1
0
0

Vlastimil Babka

Edited 2 months ago
1
4
16
@vbabka LOL, I was going to sleep and remembered this. I thought that if I wake up early you won't have a window put that comment 🤣 I knew this was coming on me...
1
0
2
@jarkko the lore police never sleeps...
0
0
3
Also for anything totally new in core architecture of any large platform: tooling tends to always lag at minimum couple of years behind ;-) Narrative of this story is always excitement, disappointment and finally growing up. Thus, I have zero doubts that Rust would not grow up as essential part of Linux core architecture over time.

It would be ultimate stupidity to make any other prediction. Even if I hated Rust I would make the same analysis because I'm a pragmatic realist.
0
0
0