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: <YdYIUAC0gopuy8r/@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 5 Jan 2022 14:06:24 -0700
From:   Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>
To:     SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Jesse Barnes <jsbarnes@...gle.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Michael Larabel <Michael@...haellarabel.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Ying Huang <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        page-reclaim@...gle.com, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/9] Multigenerational LRU Framework

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 11:25:27AM +0000, SeongJae Park wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 03:53:07 -0700 Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 08:55:34AM +0000, SeongJae Park wrote:
> > > Hi Yu,
> > > 
> > > On Tue, 4 Jan 2022 13:22:19 -0700 Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com> wrote:
> [...]
> > > I think similar works are already available out of the box with the latest
> > > mainline tree, though it might be suboptimal in some cases.
> > 
> > Ok, I will sound harsh because I hate it when people challenge facts
> > while having no idea what they are talking about.
> > 
> > Our jobs are help the leadership make best decisions by providing them
> > with facts, not feeding them crap.
> 
> I was using the word "similar", to represent this is only for a rough concept
> level similarity, rather than detailed facts.  But, seems it was not enough,
> sorry.  Anyway, I will not talk more and thus disturb you having the important
> discussion with leaders here, as you are asking.

First of all, I want to apologize.

I detested what I read, and I still don't like "a rough concept level
similarity" sitting next to a factual statement. But as Borislav has
reminded me, my tone did cross the line. I should have had used an
objective approach to express my (very) different views.

I hope that's all water under the bridge now. And I do plan to carry
on with what I should have had done.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ