linux-kernel - Re: KVM: s390: Move two error code assignments in kvm_vm_ioctl_get_dirty

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: <d9f8f874-9c90-12cd-bf21-1270890041b4@de.ibm.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 Jan 2017 13:38:52 +0100
From:   Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
        Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: KVM: s390: Move two error code assignments in
 kvm_vm_ioctl_get_dirty_log()

On 01/24/2017 01:31 PM, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>> It's just not possible to discuss things with you.
> 
> I wonder about your conclusion. We have got just different software
> development opinions on some details.
> 
> I assume that a few additional dialogue techniques could help a bit more
> in our communication difficulties.

I will also start to ignore all mails from you.
> 
> 
>> If other people want to merge your patches to KVM, they are free to do so.
> 
> I am curious if other update suggestions will be picked up
> in a constructive way.

There is only one person on this list that is not constructive, and that
person is you.