---
# System prepended metadata

title: Meeting 2024-02-07
tags: [meeting notes]

---

# Meeting 2024-02-07
<!-- Leave your topic starting with ### in the relevant sections below -->

## Critical
<!-- bugs, soundness issues, urgent patches/reviews etc. -->

## Status Reports
<!-- You want to report on something you are working on/request reviews.
Or you want to know the status of something someone else is doing -->

## Discussion Questions
<!-- Anything that requires lengthy discussion/more general questions also fit here -->

### Red/black tree

What's the plan?

Alice: We may or may not be able to replace all usages. I'd like to merge it, then maybe we can take it out later.

Boqun: It's not a general red/black tree, but just provides a key/value api, and does not support intrusive entries. Perhaps we could make it binder specific?

## Data races

https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/CALNs47uy5rQ15wByzQA0_YzORM0nTFdi9-TvwyC4+ZTXVQBj4g@mail.gmail.com/

Alice: I have writes into disjoint places in the same page. I have a data structure that, if it is correct, guarantees that those writes are actually disjoint. But that means I have to write `SAFETY` comments arguing that the data structure is correct. Should we have a way / API (perhaps calling into assembly or C, or perhaps with a new feature in the Rust compiler) that is safe to do such writes, even if they happen to not be disjoint? That way I do not need to write that sort of non-local `SAFETY` comments.

Benno: What about moving the argument to the range allocator?

## Miscellaneous
<!-- stuff that does not fit into other categories -->
