netdev - Re: [PATCH V4 0/5] mlx5 ConnectX control misc driver

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: Mon, 8 Apr 2024 10:02:28 +0200
From: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>
CC: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, "David
 Ahern" <dsahern@...nel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>, Leonid Bloch
	<lbloch@...dia.com>, Itay Avraham <itayavr@...dia.com>, Saeed Mahameed
	<saeedm@...dia.com>, Aron Silverton <aron.silverton@...cle.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org"
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Andy Gospodarek <andrew.gospodarek@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 0/5] mlx5 ConnectX control misc driver

On 4/5/24 12:41, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 08:46:41PM +0100, Edward Cree wrote:
>> On 04/04/2024 19:35, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 07:06:53PM +0100, Edward Cree wrote:
>>>> Why?  What does the kernel get out of it?
>>>>
>>>> Maybe *you* need them to be supported, but maybe you should have
>>>>   thought of that earlier in the design process.  ("A failure on
>>>>   your part to foresee the eminently foreseeable does not
>>>>   constitute an emergency on mine.")
>>>> If we let folks bypass our standards with a _fait accompli_, we
>>>>   don't really have standards in the first place.
>>>
>>> Sorry, who are "we" and what are "our standards"?
>>
>> As should be obvious from context, "we" in that sentence referred to
>>   the mainline kernel.  And while participants in this thread currently
>>   disagree on what "our standards" are, I hope it is not contentious
>>   that the kernel community *does* have standards as to what code and
>>   design is acceptable for inclusion.
> 
> You didn't answer my question. What are "our standards"?
> 
> Thanks
> 

Our standards include use of tone that is welcoming, and, in this
thread, you are aggressive instead.

With that said, I appreciate your review feedback that I have received
from you.