On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 9:02 AM David Gow <[email protected]> wrote: > > In general, I think changes such as those in this series are going to > get progressively more prone to conflicts as Rust is adopted by other > subsystems, as the 'rust' tree won't be the only one carrying changes > which could be affected. Maybe in the future it'd make sense to split > these up into a series which enables the new feature, and only then > put the warnings in place in the next version?
+1, I had to do a two-cycle split for other things in the past already, e.g. for Gary's FFI series. I agree that churn for this kind of change has a cost. For tree-wide series, it will become harder and harder over time, just like in C, and some changes and cleanups may take several cycles. For Clippy lints, I think we have some extra flexibility. We still aim to keep everything Clippy-clean (and patches sent should be sent clean under the latest stable Rust version at least, and maintainers should enable Clippy in their test runs), but if something slips in a particular corner/config/arch that is not routinely tested, it is not the end of the world as long as it gets cleaned up. Anyway, KUnit `#[test]`s are in -- I was not planning to merge this now anyway, it should be reviewed a bit more. Thanks! Cheers, Miguel
