👽Dropped at birth from space to earth👽

👽pup/it/she👽

  • 0 Posts
  • 56 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 20th, 2023

help-circle


    1. Not a dude, don’t call me that.
    2. I haven’t replied to you before now.
    3. I never said you were wrong about smartphone usage. You’re acting like it’s a hot take that everyone has a smartphone, as if people that have them can’t/won’t own a PC.
    4. Announcing you’re drunk like this is kinda sad friend.
    5. If you are, maybe just stop replying in random threads acting like a jerk?

  • Others have said the same, but why do you believe these things are mutually exclusive? Like yes, everyone has a computer in their pocket, but why does that prevent them from having a desktop, or a laptop, or a tablet? There are 1.75 Billion PC gamers as of 2020, though that includes laptop (and assumedly Steam Deck and associated handheld) users as well. Desktops are still incredibly common and popular computing devices, they aren’t going anywhere anytime soon. Let alone that laptops are incredibly common too. I genuinely don’t know anyone in my circles that doesn’t have a laptop, a desktop, or both.















  • Except you’re wrong about them wanting to put Rust code in the DMA subtree. As per the article linked below by M1ch431:

    In a message to the Linux kernel mailing list, Hellwig wrote: “No Rust code in kernel/dma, please.” For what it’s worth, the patch added code to the rust/kernel portion of the Linux source tree, not kernel/dma, as far as we can tell.

    All they were doing is adding an abstraction layer, within the already existing Rust code, so that rust drivers could communicate with the C DMA code in a uniform and predictable manner. It would have put far more work on maintainers, both C and Rust alike, to have each and every driver implement its own abstraction to the DMA API. Issues would have been/will be filed against the kernel/dma subtree in error due to issues with these myriad abstraction layers.