[evanjrowley]

Linus said that non-rustacean C programmers cannot veto rust code, but he did not clearly state how it works going the opposite way. It was rustacean-proposed changes on the C side that led to this drama. I don't see much progress here.

[Diggsey]

I don't think that's accurate. It was adding Rust DMA code that was to be shared between Rust drivers that was the spark. The C code was unchanged AFAIK.

[dralley]

The patches did not touch the C side whatsoever, a fact that Linus was pretty vocal about in his berating.

[timeon]

> It was rustacean-proposed changes on the C side that led to this drama.

Why would you say something like that?

From the e-mail [0] the article is based on:

> The fact is, the pull request you objected to DID NOT TOUCH THE DMA LAYER AT ALL.

> It was literally just another user of it, in a completely separate subdirectory, that didn't change the code you maintain in _any_ way, shape, or form.

[0]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2025/2/20/2066