Hector Martin (@[email protected])
social.treehouse.systems
Behold, a Linux maintainer openly admitting to attempting to sabotage the entire Rust for Linux project: https://lwn.net/ml/all/[email protected]/ The good news is this doesn't affect drm/asahi, our GPU driver. The bad news is it does affect all the *other* drivers we're (re)writing in Rust, two so far with a third one coming. Another choice quote, calling R4L "cancer": https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/ Personally, I would consider this grounds for removal of Christoph from the Linux project on Code of Conduct violation grounds, but sadly I doubt much will happen other than draining a lot of people's energy and will to continue the project until Linus says "fuck you" or something. As for how to move forward, if I were one of the Rust maintainers, I would just merge the patch (which does *not* touch code formally maintained by the dissenter). Either Linus takes the pull, and whatever Christoph says is irrelevant, or he doesn't, and R4L dies. Everything else is a waste of everyone's time and energy. Edit: Sent in my 2 cents: https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/[email protected]/T/#m1944b6d485070970e359bbc7baa71b04c86a30af

Behold, a Linux maintainer openly admitting to attempting to sabotage the entire Rust for Linux project:

https://lwn.net/ml/all/[email protected]/

The good news is this doesn’t affect drm/asahi, our GPU driver. The bad news is it does affect all the other drivers we’re (re)writing in Rust, two so far with a third one coming.

Another choice quote, calling R4L “cancer”: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/

Personally, I would consider this grounds for removal of Christoph from the Linux project on Code of Conduct violation grounds, but sadly I doubt much will happen other than draining a lot of people’s energy and will to continue the project until Linus says “fuck you” or something.

As for how to move forward, if I were one of the Rust maintainers, I would just merge the patch (which does not touch code formally maintained by the dissenter). Either Linus takes the pull, and whatever Christoph says is irrelevant, or he doesn’t, and R4L dies. Everything else is a waste of everyone’s time and energy.

Edit: Sent in my 2 cents: https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/[email protected]/T/#m1944b6d485070970e359bbc7baa71b04c86a30af

  • Scoopta
    12·
    23 hours ago

    C is basically high level assembly. It’s hardware agnostic high level assembly. I have written both, this is personal experience and also I believe even Linus has said EXACTLY that statement. It is an opinion ofc and you’re welcome to disagree but it isn’t just me.

    I never said it was a policy but it’s definitely true. Inline assembly IS still assembly. I’m saying if the code can be written in C it more than likely will be over assembly unless there is a very good reason to write it in ASM. The kernel is 97.97% C and just over 1% ASM. If that doesn’t prove what I’m getting at Idk what else will. It’s a totally different circumstance than replacing large swaths of C with rust or introducing large amounts of rust in favor of C.

    • CorbinEnglish
      1·
      2 hours ago

      Whose arguments are you apologizing for? Read the thread backwards. Your claims about C and kernel policy were wrong, therefore @[email protected]’s point about multiple languages was right, therefore your main defense of Hellwig acting in good faith is unevidenced. So, are you still so ready to insist that Hellwig is arguing in good faith? Would you say that this thread has adequately discussed the technical details and is ready to return to the overarching political point?

      I would recommend looking at English WP’s style guide on weasel words. Rather than matching evidence and countering claims, you’ve set up a nest of strongly-held opinions with words like “basically”, “personal experience”, “I believe”, “an opinion of course”, “it isn’t just me”, and refused to actually directly engage with the evidence scrutinized. Given that it takes maybe five minutes to find even just one piece of assembly that has no justification for not being written in C, I think that it’s fair to characterize your position as inconsistent with actual kernel-hacking practices at best.