Photo credit: arstechnica.com

Exploring the Role of Rust in the Linux Kernel Development

In the ongoing discourse surrounding the integration of Rust into the Linux kernel, opinions vary widely among developers and maintainers. Notably, Linus Torvalds addresses the balance of power in these discussions, stating that while “nobody is forced to deal with Rust,” it does not mean “everybody is allowed to veto any Rust code.” This highlights the complexity inherent in handling the relationship between existing C code and any potential Rust implementations.

Debating the Benefits of Rust

Greg Kroah-Hartman, a prominent figure in kernel development, has expressed his views on the necessity and potential advantages of introducing Rust into the kernel framework. In a recent communication regarding the “Rust kernel policy,” he remarked, “As someone who has seen almost EVERY kernel bugfix and security issue for the past 15+ years … I think I can speak on this topic.” His experience positions him as a knowledgeable advocate for change.

Kroah-Hartman points out that many of the bugs in the current kernel stem from “stupid little corner cases in C that are totally gone in Rust.” The desire to incorporate Rust is rooted in the belief that it allows developers to redirect their attention toward more significant issues. While acknowledging the substantial legacy of C—comprising “30 million lines of C code”—he argues that the addition of new code and drivers in Rust represents a forward-thinking strategy. “Why wouldn’t we do this?” he asks, emphasizing the benefits Rust could bring to kernel development.

Despite admitting that Rust is not a “silver bullet,” Kroah-Hartman praises its advantageous features, particularly for developers managing the complexities of the kernel’s APIs. He appreciates that although mixed-language codebases can be challenging, the kernel development community has faced and overcome even more daunting situations in the past. “Adding another language really shouldn’t be a problem,” he asserts, underlining the tenacity and capability of kernel developers.

The potential rise of Rust as a major programming language within the kernel ecosystem raises questions about the longstanding dominance of C. Some discussions have even hinted at alternatives such as the Redox operating system—a Rust-centered microkernel—or the theoretical approach of forking Linux into a purely C-based project. However, such ideas overlook the critical importance of Linux as a foundational operating system that supports a vast array of technologies globally.

Moving Forward

As the industry contemplates the future of kernel development, the integration of Rust remains a topic of both enthusiasm and skepticism. The outcome of this debate will likely influence not just the kernel’s architecture but also the broader landscape of software development practices. The community’s determination to embrace innovation while maintaining stability is essential in navigating the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.

Source
arstechnica.com