Re: [PATCH v6 0/5] Introduce bitfield and move register macro to rust/kernel/

[Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Oct 07, 2025 at 10:20:54PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Tue Oct 7, 2025 at 7:42 PM JST, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 12:36 PM Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> We can assume maintainership of this of course, but is there a problem
> >> if this falls under the core Rust umbrella? As this is a pretty core
> >> functionality. Miguel and other core folks, WDYT?
> >
> > I think what Yury may mean is that this should get an explicit
> > `MAINTAINERS` subentry even if it falls under `rust/kernel/` -- I
> > agree that is a good idea.

Exactly. Otherwise we'll end up with a single maintainer for a huge
codebase written by different people for different reasons. This is how
lib/ is maintained now. Not very effective. 
 
> Ack - how do you expect things to work in terms of code flow? Do we need
> to have a dedicated tree and send you pull requests? If so, should we
> host it under the Rust-for-Linux Github org?

(Not sure you've asked me but anyways)

For maintenance hierarchy I'd suggest a structure where an author of
the new subsystem obviously becomes a maintainer, then some acknowledged
Rust person co-maintains it, and lately some non-rust person from a
related kernel subsystem becomes a reviewer or co-maintainer.

In 6.18 we did this for bitmaps, and the maintenance entry looks like:

 BITMAP API [RUST]
 M:     Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
 M:     Burak Emir <bqe@google.com>
 R:     Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
 S:     Maintained
 F:     rust/kernel/bitmap.rs
 
Check 11eca92a2cae ("rust: add bitmap API").

Thanks,
Yury