+To: Zhi Wang Hi Alexandre,
On 2026-10-20 22:14:12+0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote: > On Sun Oct 11, 2026 at 9:52 PM JST, Thomas Weißschuh wrote: > > Add the Rust infrastructure to integrate with the dynamic debug > > infrastructure. > > > > Static keys are not used for now, as the full bindings are missing > > for those. A follow-up series will add that. > > Also custom classes are not supported yet, but could be added on top. > > > > Patches 1-4: Generic Rust preparation patches. > > Patches 5-7: C dynamic debug preparation patches. > > Patches 8: Rust Dynamic debug infrastructure. > > Patches 9-11: Rust Dynamic debug enablement. > > Were you aware of this series [1]? I was was told about the original work from Andrew back at Kangrejos. However I was unable to find it on LKML and it was not clear how far along that series has come along. The posting of Zhi's v3 only happened after I started on my variant, and I did not see it until you mentioned it. So my development is completely independent from Andrew's and Zhi's. > There seems to be quite a bit of overlap. Indeed. I see pros for both serieses: Mine: * No FFI in the fastpath. * No need for RUST_MODNAME. * Use of Bounded. * Tests for the flag encoding. * modname!() as function name. (As discussed with Benno and Gary and LPC) * Better encapsulation of 'struct Descriptor' (partially not yet posted) * Use of Opaque<> to wrap bindings::_ddebug (not yet posted). * Use of !cv() (not yet posted). Andrew/Zhi: * Better docs. * Static branch support. * static_branch_likely!() support is missing however. * I also have follow-up patches to enable static_branch_likely!(). * host doctest support. I am perfectly fine with merging both serieses. Thomas > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
