linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 0/5] Micron SLC NAND filling block

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:   Tue, 2 Jun 2020 09:48:25 +0200
From:   Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
To:     Bean Huo <huobean@...il.com>
Cc:     miquel.raynal@...tlin.com, vigneshr@...com, s.hauer@...gutronix.de,
        derosier@...il.com, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Bean Huo <beanhuo@...ron.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/5] Micron SLC NAND filling block

Hi Bean,

On Mon, 01 Jun 2020 23:10:43 +0200
Bean Huo <huobean@...il.com> wrote:

> Hi Richard 
> would you please help us confirm below question??

Miquel suggested an approach that would allow us to deal with both JFFS2
and UBI/UBIFS without having any FS/wear-leveling specific code at the
NAND level, but you decided to ignore his comments. Sorry but there's
nothing we can do to help you if you don't listen to our
recommendations.

I've been quite disappointed by your behavior in the past, and it
continues. Recently you've taken Miquel's patches and claimed ownership
on them (probably not intentionally, but still) while you were clearly
unable to rework your original series the way I suggested (which Miquel
did after seeing you would never send new versions). And when Miquel
suggested a change to the implementation he had done based on the
discussion we had with Richard, you decided to ignore it and pursue in
the original direction. So, quite frankly, I'm really not convinced you
can conduct such a change.

Regards,

Boris