| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <a781481a0705180606i28b2f9a8q89b3b618f40d4122@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 18:36:48 +0530 From: "Satyam Sharma" <satyam.sharma@...il.com> To: "Matthew Wilcox" <matthew@....cx> Cc: "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Asynchronous scsi scanning On 5/18/07, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx> wrote: > On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 09:11:58AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote: > > It's also somewhat a matter of *taste* (and hence subjective), if you > > _still_ don't get it, Matthew, then there's no point continuing this thread > > and trying to convince you ad infinitum. > > Right. It's a matter of taste. What makes you think you have taste? Well, my stand uptil now has been to consider as many options as possible. I have certainly not married myself to just one particular way of doing this -- but I bet that the one way that I do _dislike_, the dummy module one, would not be found tasteful / best by most people around (yourself included, as you say). > I don't think that the module solution is perfect. But abusing the > module parameters is a worse idea. sysfs just isn't a good fit for this, > according to my taste. The whole point is to at least _consider_ other alternatives. And I've found your attitude so far to have been extremely blocking / difficult. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists