Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 14 Aug 2023 17:25:49 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Michele Dalle Rive <dallerivemichele@gmail.com>
Cc:     Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
        Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@gmail.com>,
        Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@gmail.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>, Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>,
        =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn?= Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com>,
        Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@proton.me>,
        Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>,
        Davide Rovelli <davide.rovelli@usi.ch>,
        rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] Rust Socket abstractions
Message-ID: <2023081411-apache-tubeless-7bb3@gregkh>
References: <20230814092302.1903203-1-dallerivemichele@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230814092302.1903203-1-dallerivemichele@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 11:22:55AM +0200, Michele Dalle Rive wrote:
> This patch series is intended to create Rust abstractions for Sockets
> and other fundamental network entities. 
> 
> Specifically, it was added:
> - Ip address and Socket address wrappers (for `in_addr`, `in6_addr`,
>   `sockaddr_in`, `sockaddr_in6`, `sockaddr_storage`).
> - Socket wrapper.
> - Socket flags and options enums.
> - TCP and UDP specific abstractions over the Rust Socket structure.
> 
> This series is a RFC because I would appreciate some feedback about:
> - The structure of the module: is the division of the files and modules
>   appropriate or should it be more or less fine-grained?
>   Also, should the `net` module export all the structures of its
>   submodules? I noticed that it is done in the standard library.
> - Whether the documentation is comprehensive enough.
> - A few other specific questions, written in the individual patches.
> 
> I would greatly appreciate any kind of feedback or opinion. 
> I am pretty new to the patch/mailing list world, so please point out any
> mistake I might make.

The best feedback is "who will use these new interfaces?"  Without that,
it's really hard to review a patchset as it's difficult to see how the
bindings will be used, right?

thanks,

greg k-h