linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: boot: Fix mixed indentation in a20.c

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, 25 Nov 2013 16:51:59 -0800
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Johannes Löthberg <johannes@...iasis.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: boot: Fix mixed indentation in a20.c

On Mon, 2013-11-25 at 11:18 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-11-19 at 10:24 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > > I'll take a proper cleanup,
> > > but just whitespace... just pointless churn.
> > What in your view would be "a proper cleanup" for a20.c?
> 
> If a newbie does a meaningful, complete, well done cleanup patch then 
> congratulations and any such help is welcome.
> 
> If you as a more experienced kernel developer do a cleanup as part of 
> some real work then sure, all such cleanups are welcome and they are a 
> natural part of development work.
> 
> So a standalone cleanup patch to a20.c from _you_ would probably not 
> qualify, almost by definition: your first patch was applied 7 years 
> ago,

More than 10, but I only note that by looking in a mirror.

> you are by far not a newbie anymore, yet you seem to be mostly 
> stuck on the 'cleanups and trivialities' level! Sheesh!
> 
> My message to the buerocrat Joe Perches is: please leave trivial and 
> printk patches to newbies, you need to raise to the next level of 
> kernel development already.

Were I employed to improve the kernel, I'd probably subsume
my neatening tendencies to the needs of the employer.

Thankfully, I'm not employed to improve Linux and I can
choose what I want to do without need to fix bugs that cause
entities to lose money, customers or profit.  Nor do I have
to add hardware support for whatever new gadget comes along.

> FYI, Linux is a meritocracy, not a bureaucracy:

I don't believe that Linux is a meritocracy at all.

It has become a business entity all to itself and is nearly
completely supported and maintained by profit-seeking
ventures such as the one that employs you.

Is any major maintainer an unpaid, unremunerated volunteer?

> creating self-serving 
> churn and attention-seeking

I think you've a odd view of what I submit.

I've a hard time believing I'm either self-serving or
attention-seeking.  I'll advance my belief that I'm rather
unassuming and not prone to spotlights.

If I see what I believe a defect in either logic or style,
I either comment on it if it's a patch, or submit a patch
myself.  I provide comments a fair amount.

> but unimportant patches is not the way to 
> gain kernel development credibility long term, and eventually people 
> start protecting against your increasing abuse of the development 
> process.

Do please reread of this thread as what I did was comment
on a particular patch by Johannes and suggested that it was
not likely a necessary thing to change.  What I tried to help
him with was understanding what, if anything, actually needed
to be or could be changed in the file.

>  IMHO.

<smile>
Perhaps you could dial down your humility a bit.
Perhaps you'll reread and see if it seems humble to you.

cheers, Joe

--
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/