Hi Daniel, On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 10:14 PM Daniel Almeida <daniel.almeida@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Again a bit new with Rust submissions. I was told by Gary Guo to > rebase on top of rust-next, but it seems *very* behind? In general, prefer the most stable base you can find: Linus' tags if possible, otherwise `rust-next` if you need something from there, otherwise you may send something on top of some prerequisites that may not have landed yet. Please see https://rust-for-linux.com/contributing#the-rust-subsystem for some other details. `rust-next` is the latest Rust state (which at the moment is just Linus' -rc1 -- did you need something that landed later in mainline? In any case, tomorrow I will likely move it to -rc5 since I will start merging). > The first patch does not build on its own due to a dead_code warning. > It is hard to not have dead code when one is adding infrastructure to be > used by others at a later opportunity. Let me know if you would like to > see the patches squashed into one to fix this. Patches series must build between each patch. However, instead of squashing, you may use `allow(dead_code)` to split patches as they would normally be split. In other words, it is more important to have patches more easily reviewable than avoiding an `allow` line. Cheers, Miguel _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
