Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] rust: add dma coherent allocator abstraction.

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

On 2/3/25 19:46, Hector Martin wrote:
> Adding Linus
> 
> My 2c: If Linus doesn't pipe up with an authoritative answer to this
> thread, Miguel and the other Rust folks should just merge this series
> once it is reviewed and ready, ignoring Christoph's overt attempt at
> sabotaging the project.

Hold your horses...  I agree that they should just merge the series in 
the unlikely event that Linus doesn't chime in over the next two months, 
but I would very strongly suggest that it's sent to Linus (assuming he 
doesn't jump in now) as a separate pull request.

This is almost always a good thing to do when you have commits that 
merit specific attention (example: 
https://www.uwsg.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/2109.2/10311.html).

My 2 cents as someone that is certainly not any kind of VIP, but has 
been in MAINTAINERS for quite a while.

> Rust folks: Please don't waste your time and mental cycles on drama like
> this. It's not worth your time. Either Linus likes it, or he doesn't.
> Everything else is distractions orchestrated by a subset of saboteur
> maintainers who are trying to demoralize you until you give up, because
> they know they're going to be on the losing side of history sooner or
> later. No amount of sabotage from old entrenched maintainers is going to
> stop the world from moving forward towards memory-safe languages.

I have a question, which is unrelated to my opinion of Rust for Linux: 
in what way do you think this tirade is actually helping?

> FWIW, in my opinion, the "cancer" comment from Christoph would be enough
> to qualify for Code-of-Conduct action, but I doubt anything of the sort
> will happen.

FWIW I agree that it was borderline and probably on the wrong side of 
the edge.  But I am happy for one that Christoph has since expanded 
beyond the "cancer" comment, because that's at least a technical 
argument, unlike yours above.

Paolo