linux-kernel - Re: [RFT 2/4] Add mod_timer

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]

Message-Id: <1234996947.4799.29.camel@laptop>
Date:	Wed, 18 Feb 2009 23:42:27 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	mingo@...e.hu, shemminger@...tta.com, kaber@...sh.net,
	rick.jones2@...com, dada1@...mosbay.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	gandalf@...g.westbo.se, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFT 2/4] Add mod_timer_noact

On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 14:04 -0800, David Miller wrote:

> And as others have pointed out you also failed to recognize
> the context of the patch posting.  It was part of a sequence
> of patches for people to test some experimental netfilter
> performance optimizations.  "RFT" was prefixed to every patch
> subject line, if any more indication was necessary.

Be that as it may, its a maintainer seeing a patch against his
subsystem, reviewing it (albeit early -- we should all want to get
around to reviewing that early) and asking for some clarification.

The fact is, Steve's changelog was very unclear to people not intimately
familiar with the problem space. Asking some clarification just isn't
weird in any way.

> Yet you object that the patches are against the networking
> and netfilter trees.
> 
> Again, your reactions were knee-jerk, by every definition of the
> term.
> 
> I know how you work Ingo, you want to be fast and efficient.
> But often, your "fast and efficient" is "careless", and this
> wastes everyone elses time and in the final analysis makes
> you "slow".

Can we please leave it at this, the technical issue seems to be delt
with. You and Ingo seems to have a gift to rub each other the wrong way,
it would be grand if you could both try to be a little forgiving and
just focus on the code/technical issues which makes Linux to what it is,
technically excellent ;-)

--
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/