On Sat, Aug 6, 2022 at 12:25 PM Konstantin Shelekhin <k.shelekhin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I sense possible problems here. It's common for a kernel code to pass > flags during memory allocations. Yes, of course. We will support this, but how exactly it will look like, to what extent upstream Rust's `alloc` could support our use cases, etc. has been on discussion for a long time. For instance, see https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/pull/815 for a potential extension trait approach with no allocator carried on the type that Andreas wrote after a discussion in the last informal call: let a = Box::try_new_atomic(101)?; Cheers, Miguel
