linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v3 0/8] ACPI, APEI patches for 2.6.37

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, 27 Oct 2010 12:07:30 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
Cc:	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...hat.com>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	BorislavPetkov <petkovbb@...glemail.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v3 0/8] ACPI, APEI patches for 2.6.37

On Wed, 2010-10-27 at 13:28 +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> v3:
> 
> - Rework lock-less memory allocator and lock-less list.
> 
> v2:
> 
> - Some minor changes according to Andi's comments.
> 
> [PATCH -v3 1/8] ACPI, APEI, Add ERST record ID cache
> [PATCH -v3 2/8] lib, Make gen_pool memory allocator lock-less
> [PATCH -v3 3/8] lib, Add lock-less NULL terminated single list
> [PATCH -v3 4/8] Hardware error device core
> [PATCH -v3 5/8] Hardware error record persistent support
> [PATCH -v3 6/8] ACPI, APEI, Use ERST for hardware error persisting before panic
> [PATCH -v3 7/8] ACPI, APEI, Report GHES error record with hardware error device core
> [PATCH -v3 8/8] ACPI, APEI, Generic Hardware Error Source POLL/IRQ/NMI notification type support

You forgot to CC all people who participated in the previous discussion.

You seem to have forgotten to address the high-level feedback given by
the x86 maintainers.

All you've done is decreased the arch/x86/ footprint of the patch
series, but neither you nor Andi have addressed the technical arguments
against adding this ABI.

Nor have you engaged in conversation with the other EDAC people on how
to extend the existing interface, or even work towards creating
something new that would cater to all interested parties.

Not charmed at all by your attitude.
--
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/