netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] net: stmmac: add drop transmit status feature

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 12 Apr 2017 11:28:25 -0400 (EDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com
Cc:     andrew@...n.ch, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] net: stmmac: add drop transmit status
 feature

From: Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 16:13:33 +0100

> Às 3:51 PM de 4/12/2017, David Miller escreveu:
>> You cannot develop performance based features and only test their
>> impact on FPGA when almost all users are on real silicon.
>> 
>> And this requirement is absolutely non-negotiable.
>> 
>> You must test the impact on real silicon otherwise your performance
>> numbers, which are required to be provided in the commit message
>> for any "performance" feature or change, are completely useless.
> 
> Next time I won't mention anything about performance, honestly. "Drop TX Status"
> is just an IP Core feature that can or not be used, it is up to the driver user.

Being dishonest about why a change might be desirable doesn't help things, in fact
now that you've stated this intent in the future, people know to be suspucious of
your changes.

I seriously don't think you realize the ramifications of what you just said right
there.

Everything here is about trust, and if you create a situation where you can't be
trusted then the process of doing upstream development will be extremely difficult
and time consuming for you.

Thanks.