On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 07:56:35AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > Hi Paul, > > On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 03:53:13PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 07, 2021 at 01:56:21PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > Hello! > > > > > > On the perhaps unlikely chance that this is new news of interest... > > > > > > I have finally prototyped the full "So You Want to Rust the Linux > > > Kernel?" series (as in marked "under construction"). > > > > > > https://paulmck.livejournal.com/62436.html > > > > And this blog series is now proclaimed to be feature complete. > > > > Recommendations (both short- and long-term) may be found in the last post, > > "TL;DR: Memory-Model Recommendations for Rusting the Linux Kernel", > > at https://paulmck.livejournal.com/65341.html. > > Thanks for putting this together! For the short-term recommendations, I > think one practical goal would be having the equivalent (or stronger) > litmus tests in Rust for the ones in tools/memory-model/litmus-tests. > The translation of litmus tests may be trivial, but it at least ensure > us that Rust can support the existing patterns widely used in Linux > kernel. Of course, the Rust litmus tests don't have to be able to run > with herd, we just need some code snippest to check our understanding of > Rust memory model. ;-) It would be very helpful for klitmus to be able to check Rust-code memory ordering, now that you mention it! This would be useful (for example) to test the Rust wrappers on weakly ordered systems, such as ARM's. > Besides, it's interesting to how things react with each if one function > in the litmus test is in Rust and the other is in C ;-) Maybe this is a > long-term goal. > > Thoughts? These issues are quite important. How do you feel that they should be tracked? Thanx, Paul
