On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 3:55 PM Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From what I can see in this series, the bindings required adding > a number of generic functions to the Rust support code and also most > discussion revolved around that. I'm worried this might be the case also > for foreseeable future updates, until more building blocks are in place. > It then makes me think most changes to this code will need to go through > the Rust tree for now. Those would normally go through the Rust tree, yeah. Since we don't have many users yet, and we avoid adding dead code in general, things are fairly barebones. If you prefer, we can take the non-module related dependencies through the Rust tree this cycle, and then you can pick the modules parts in the next one. > On the other hand, if the changes are reasonably limited to mostly > rust/kernel/module_param.rs and rust/macros/module.rs, then yes, I'd say > it should be ok to take the patches through the modules tree. Yeah, that should be the case. Worst case, we can do the delay-a-cycle thing, or if urgent create a small branch, etc. Cheers, Miguel
