linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v18 net-next 1/1] hv_sock: introduce Hyper-V Sockets

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CO2PR03MB218254B70CBD052069CDEB4FBF0E0@CO2PR03MB2182.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date:	Tue, 26 Jul 2016 05:10:08 +0000
From:	Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devel@...uxdriverproject.org" <devel@...uxdriverproject.org>,
	"olaf@...fle.de" <olaf@...fle.de>,
	"apw@...onical.com" <apw@...onical.com>,
	"jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
	"vkuznets@...hat.com" <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
	"cavery@...hat.com" <cavery@...hat.com>,
	KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>,
	"joe@...ches.com" <joe@...ches.com>,
	"rolf.neugebauer@...ker.com" <rolf.neugebauer@...ker.com>,
	"mkubecek@...e.cz" <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
	Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
	"dave.scott@...ker.com" <dave.scott@...ker.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v18 net-next 1/1] hv_sock: introduce Hyper-V Sockets

> From: David Miller [mailto:davem@...emloft.net]
> ...
> From: Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>
> Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 03:09:16 +0000
> 
> > BTW, during the past month, at least 7 other people also reviewed
> > the patch and gave me quite a few good comments, which have
> > been addressed.
> 
> Correction: Several people gave coding style and simple corrections
> to your patch.
> 
> Very few gave any review of the _SUBSTANCE_ of your changes.
> 
> And the one of the few who did, and suggested you build your
> facilities using the existing S390 hypervisor socket infrastructure,
> you brushed off _IMMEDIATELY_.
>
> That drives me crazy.  The one person who gave you real feedback
> you basically didn't consider seriously at all.

Hi David,
I'm very sorry -- I guess I must have missed something here -- I don't
remember somebody replied with S390 hypervisor socket
infrastructure... I'm re-reading all the replies, trying to locate the
reply and I'll find out why I didn't take it seriously. Sorry in advance.

> I know why you don't want to consider alternative implementations,
> and it's because you guys have so much invested in what you've
> implemented already.
This is not true. I'm absolutely open to any possibility to have an
alternative better implementation.
Please allow me to find the "S390 hypervisor socket infrastructure" reply
first and I'll report back ASAP.
 
> But that's tough and not our problem.
> 
> And until this changes, yes, this submission will be stuck in the
> mud and continue slogging on like this.

I definitely agree and understand.

Thanks,
-- Dexuan