Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linux Kernel's Preliminary Rust Code Seeing 64-bit POWER Support

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Linux Kernel's Preliminary Rust Code Seeing 64-bit POWER Support

    Phoronix: Linux Kernel's Preliminary Rust Code Seeing 64-bit POWER Support

    Excitement is building around initial support for the Rust language within the Linux kernel that arrived in Linux-Next and is now seeing more developer interest...

    https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...l-Rust-PPC64LE

  • #2
    There is no place for Rust in the Linux Kernel, as long as rust cant be compiled via the GCC suit.
    But I believe the rust fan-base will have moved on to the next hype language until that happens.

    Comment


    • #3
      Kernel starts to Rust...hope the gears will be still moving smoothly

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Alexmitter View Post
        There is no place for Rust in the Linux Kernel, as long as rust cant be compiled via the GCC suit.
        But I believe the rust fan-base will have moved on to the next hype language until that happens.
        I hope no one will waste they time getting rust on GCC. The whole point why rust is so good is because they put some much effort into the compiler with makes the language safer then anything else and at the same time it is really flexible. Having two compilers for it would be just a waste of dev resources.
        And Rust has a really good place in Linux kernel, it makes you code much more safe without having any performance downside.
        The whole argument "just write good C code" is stupid, even the best developers are making mistakes and having some basic rules with protected you from making such mistakes is a really good idea, especially in kernel space.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Alexmitter View Post
          But I believe the rust fan-base will have moved on to the next hype language until that happens.
          I don't really get your point. GAFAMs have tried Rust, and shown more than promising results. From then on, Rust's adoption is only going to increase, because *results*, not hype.

          BTW the "Rust fan-base" as you call it is actually very heterogeneous. You seem to imply that "Rust fans" are only composed of hype hunters (might be, to some degree), but as far as I can tell, it's mostly composed of a very broad range of programmers, coming from C, Python, ASM, JS...

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by CochainComplex View Post
            Kernel starts to Rust...hope the gears will be still moving smoothly
            Just enable the WD40 task scheduler to prevent Rust issues

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post

              Just enable the WD40 task scheduler to prevent Rust issues
              That would be a perfect name for a scheduler!

              btw...git apply-duct

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by dragonn View Post
                I hope no one will waste they time getting rust on GCC.
                https://github.com/Rust-GCC/gccrs
                The reason why it is not yet finished is as stated in the README.md that rust was for a long time so often changed that it made no sense to even try.

                Originally posted by dragonn View Post
                The whole point why rust is so good is because they put some much effort into the compiler with makes the language safer then anything else
                Rust uses a plain standard fronted to LLVM, there is no special magic on LLVM that makes rust more save compiled by it. A GCC front end could produce the same if not massively better byte code. Also, LLVM is probably the worst compiler that currently has some market share, its pseudo bytecode interpreted by some low level translator can not be trusted in a setting like a OS kernel at all. It is simply technically unpredictable.

                Originally posted by dragonn View Post
                The whole argument "just write good C code" is stupid, even the best developers are making mistakes and having some basic rules with protected you from making such mistakes is a really good idea, especially in kernel space.
                I have heard that BS before. You can certainly write unsafe rust code, the language allows that. C certainly makes it easier for you to F up, thats about all.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by all3f0r1 View Post
                  I don't really get your point. GAFAMs have tried Rust, and shown more than promising results. From then on, Rust's adoption is only going to increase, because *results*, not hype.
                  So was Go, the last hype language. And here we are now in the post Go world.

                  Originally posted by all3f0r1 View Post
                  BTW the "Rust fan-base" as you call it is actually very heterogeneous. You seem to imply that "Rust fans" are only composed of hype hunters (might be, to some degree), but as far as I can tell, it's mostly composed of a very broad range of programmers, coming from C, Python, ASM, JS...
                  Mainly people who switched from Go to Rust because as you know, trends never hold long.

                  Nothing against Rust if it just finally had a proper compiler behind that could be trusted to produce predictable results, not some pseudo bytecode generator and a low level VM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by dragonn View Post

                    I hope no one will waste they time getting rust on GCC. The whole point why rust is so good is because they put some much effort into the compiler with makes the language safer then anything else and at the same time it is really flexible. Having two compilers for it would be just a waste of dev resources.
                    Are you really convinced the llvm-based rust compiler is infallible? I'd welcome a second implementation based in gcc, just to be able to cross-check them.

                    Originally posted by dragonn View Post
                    And Rust has a really good place in Linux kernel, it makes you code much more safe without having any performance downside.
                    The whole argument "just write good C code" is stupid, even the best developers are making mistakes and having some basic rules with protected you from making such mistakes is a really good idea, especially in kernel space.
                    correct me if I'm wrong, but rust only works with a few mainstream architectures right now, not on all supported by linux?
                    the whole "it makes you code much more safe without having any performance downside" is hyperbole/marketing.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X