> A lot of memory and thread safety guarantees in Rust are only applicable to user space.
I'm not sure what you are thinking of here. Rust memory safety doesn't care about the environment at all.
I'm not sure what you are thinking of here. Rust memory safety doesn't care about the environment at all.
There are some ideas around Rust code patterns and structure for bare metal, see for example the RTFM work (now renamed). But they all do have some drawbacks such as redeuced readability and IMO too much abstraction.
Anyway, my point was that since of the guarantees Rust provides build upon certain assumptions about the environment that generally don't exist in kernel space.
Also, `unsafe` doesn't disable all language features or the type system, it just provides an escape hatch to use raw pointers. Which, yes is quite a big step away from "normal Rust", but that's why we abstract around them.
It sure is extra and boring work, but it's entirely possible to create ergonomic APIs around unsafe low level primitives. I mean, that's how a lot of stuff gets implemented in stdlib or even in some crates. We just don't interact with it frequently, though.
Not kernel developer myself, but I've done some embedded Rust and written drivers