News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:“Rust is safe” is not some kind of absolute guarantee of ... by cillian64 on Sunday October 02, 2022 @11:10AM (#33056551)
From most users’ points of view, a lot of things the kernel does (e.g. a sound card driver) are non-critical so they’d prefer an error in that driver only killed that driver and not the whole kernel. Similarly, I’d be upset if a server rebooted because of a blip in its CD-ROM driver. And if you can just reload the module which errored, all the better.

It would be cool if kernel Rust could implement a panic handler which just killed the offending module, but I’m assuming from the discussion around panics that this isn’t possible.

Re:“Rust is safe” is not some kind of absolute guarantee of ... by vips7L on Sunday October 02, 2022 @11:37AM (#33056849)
Wasn’t that the whole point of microkernels/minix vs monoliths? With drivers being in the kernel can you even restart the modules?
Re:“Rust is safe” is not some kind of absolute guarantee of ... by cillian64 on Sunday October 02, 2022 @02:20PM (#33058693)
With Linux you can unload and reload modules (rmmod, insmod) so it’s a little un-monolithic in that sense.