linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/8] FPGA DFL Changes for 5.12

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 14 Jan 2021 08:48:08 -0800
From:   Moritz Fischer <mdf@...nel.org>
To:     Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>
Cc:     Moritz Fischer <mdf@...nel.org>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, moritzf@...gle.com,
        Rikard Falkeborn <rikard.falkeborn@...il.com>,
        Zheng Yongjun <zhengyongjun3@...wei.com>,
        Russ Weight <russell.h.weight@...el.com>,
        "Gerlach, Matthew" <matthew.gerlach@...el.com>,
        Sonal Santan <sonal.santan@...inx.com>,
        Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...el.com>,
        Richard Gong <richard.gong@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] FPGA DFL Changes for 5.12

On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 02:39:36PM -0800, Tom Rix wrote:
> 
> On 1/11/21 12:28 PM, Moritz Fischer wrote:
> > Tom,
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 11:46:03AM -0800, Tom Rix wrote:
> >
> > [..]
> >> I have been doing the first review in a couple of days after every patch landing.
> > I appreciate your help with doing reviews.
> >  
> >> I see some pretty good response from the developers to fix the issues raised.Ã‚Â 
> > ... yet patches have been rejected. So it doesn't seem purely a matter
> > of throughput?
> >
> >> But I do not see Moritz picking up the review until weeks later.
> > I'll admit there are delays that happen, I have a dayjob as I pointed
> > out in earlier conversations. Furthermore, just because I do not
> > immediately send out an email does not mean I don't look at stuff.
> >
> > If people show up with 100kLOC patchsets that don't pass checkpatch,
> > it'll take a while for me to even read up and understand what they're
> > doing / trying to do.
> >
> >> This consistent delay in timely reviews is a bottleneck.
> > As Greg pointed out even ones that were reviewed got rejected, so
> > clearly the issue is with the quality and not the speed at which we send
> > them on.
> >
> >> It would be good if the big first reviews could be done in parallel.
> > Again depending how the patchsets are structured it will take me a while
> > to process. Having them re-use existing infrastructure, following
> > coding and submission guidelines will speed up the process.
> >
> > On a personal level, being told I'm too slow and not doing my job as
> > maintainer doesn't exactly increase my motivation to get to it ...
> 
> Sorry about that.
> 
> I really do want to help out, earlier you mentioned patchwork problems.
> 
> If you can point me at the wreckage, I'll take a look.

I need to add you as reviewer there. Mostly needs triaging which of the
open patches are still relevant.

I think you could ping kernel.org helpdesk.

- Moritz