Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210704202756.29107-1-ojeda@kernel.org> <20210704202756.29107-14-ojeda@kernel.org>
 <CAKwvOdmei2Ckfk5xgkvo8wEXEFK=Yv5-yjKhHoi_bmVr4MiEnw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKwvOdmei2Ckfk5xgkvo8wEXEFK=Yv5-yjKhHoi_bmVr4MiEnw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 14 Jul 2021 21:55:02 +0200
Message-ID: <CANiq72m9WdbRjNS7CUecmwVkefPQPUS+hi-f+gPZg1yKJPObtg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/17] docs: add Rust documentation
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Cc:     Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        rust-for-linux <rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@gmail.com>,
        Geoffrey Thomas <geofft@ldpreload.com>,
        Finn Behrens <me@kloenk.de>,
        Adam Bratschi-Kaye <ark.email@gmail.com>,
        Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@google.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
        Sumera Priyadarsini <sylphrenadin@gmail.com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@gmail.com>,
        Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>,
        Boris-Chengbiao Zhou <bobo1239@web.de>,
        Fox Chen <foxhlchen@gmail.com>,
        Ayaan Zaidi <zaidi.ayaan@gmail.com>,
        Douglas Su <d0u9.su@outlook.com>, Yuki Okushi <jtitor@2k36.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 8:38 PM Nick Desaulniers
<ndesaulniers@google.com> wrote:
>
> Is rust-analyzer necessary to talk about? I think most kernel
> developers aren't using LSP clients, so it doesn't seem necessary to
> talk about for kernel development IMO.  If a developer would like to
> use an LSP client, they should refer to the documentation of their LSP
> client.

I think it is fair to advertise it given we have support for
generating its configuration.

Otherwise, people might miss the script and spend time generating a
configuration by hand (which takes quite some time and would not carry
the `CONFIG_*` settings etc.).

And they may start using it if they did not hear about it! :)

> Should Documentation/process/changes.rst be updated to note which
> versions of all of these tools are currently supported?

For the ones required for building, they are already there (i.e.
`rustc` and `bindgen`).

For the rest, most come with the Rust toolchain, so I think there is
no need to list them explicitly. For `rust-analyzer`, it is "rolling",
so it does not make much sense to put it in any case.

> For the compat table, for 32b ARM, why is v6 supported but not v7? Why
> only when optimizations are enabled?

For arch support, we only have a few fixed Rust target files for the
moment as examples (thus we picked v6) -- we will generate those with
a script later on.

For particular restrictions (such as the optimization level), we will
look into solving those bits later on. In any case, it is not a
priority, since less than `-O2` is intended only for kernel hacking.

> Doesn't this also depend on rustc having support for a given target
> triple? Just because LLVM has a backend for a given architecture
> doesn't mean rustc can target it, right?

No -- currently we use custom target files instead of particular
triples (see previous point), which are basically the settings `rustc`
forwards to LLVM for codegen.

Cheers,
Miguel