Re: [RFC PATCH 00/11] Rust null block driver

From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: "Keith Busch" <kbusch@kernel.org>,
	"Bart Van Assche" <bvanassche@acm.org>,
	"Andreas Hindborg" <nmi@metaspace.dk>,
	"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@lst.de>,
	"Damien Le Moal" <Damien.LeMoal@wdc.com>,
	"Hannes Reinecke" <hare@suse.de>,
	lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
	"Matthew Wilcox" <willy@infradead.org>,
	"Miguel Ojeda" <ojeda@kernel.org>,
	"Alex Gaynor" <alex.gaynor@gmail.com>,
	"Wedson Almeida Filho" <wedsonaf@gmail.com>,
	"Boqun Feng" <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	"Gary Guo" <gary@garyguo.net>,
	"Björn Roy Baron" <bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com>,
	"Benno Lossin" <benno.lossin@proton.me>,
	"open list" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	gost.dev@samsung.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/11] Rust null block driver
Date: Thu, 4 May 2023 20:52:03 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZFR9Y12sSRGHvUZK@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e7bc2155-613b-8904-9942-2e9615b0dc63@kernel.dk>

On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 01:02:19PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> null_blk or not, it's more if we want to go down this path of
> maintaining rust bindings for the block code in general. If the answer
> to that is yes, then doing null_blk seems like a great choice as it's
> not a critical piece of infrastructure. It might even be a good idea to
> be able to run both, for performance purposes, as the bindings or core
> changes.

Yes.  And I'm not in favor of it, especially right now.  There is
so much work we need to do that requires changes all over (e.g.
sorting out the request_queue vs gendisk, and making the bio_vec
folio or even better physical address based), and the last thing I
need is a binding to a another language, one that happens to have
nice features but that also is really ugly.