On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 11:41:54AM +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 09:39:55AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 09:49:47AM +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 09:08:12AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 04:21:33PM +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
What does "your code" mean? Duplicated in every driver?
Yes, interfaces to the DMA API should stay in readable C code and not
in weird bindings so that it reminds greppable and maintainable.
Rust drivers shouldn't use C APIs directly, but rather use an abstraction of the
corresponding C API.
Don't force me to deal with your shiny language of the day.
Again, no one asks you to deal with or maintain this piece of Rust code.
Maintaining
multi-language projects is a pain I have no interest in dealing with.
If you want to use something that's not C, be that assembly or rust you
write to C interfaces and deal with the impedence mismatch yourself as
far as I'm concerned.
This is exactly what we're doing and proposing here, isn't it?
We wrote a single piece of Rust code that abstracts the C API for all Rust
drivers, which we offer to maintain ourselves.
What else are you asking for?
Since there hasn't been a reply so far, I assume that we're good with
maintaining the DMA Rust abstractions separately.
Hence, the next version of this patch series will have the corresponding
maintainer entry.
- Danilo