linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] x86: make pat and mtrr independent from each other

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: <a4572696-8c4b-36ee-e067-8aa8a9786ad1@netscape.net>
Date:   Sun, 14 Aug 2022 12:03:23 -0400
From:   Chuck Zmudzinski <brchuckz@...scape.net>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@...mhuis.info>
Cc:     jbeulich@...e.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
        regressions@...ts.linux.dev, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
        x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] x86: make pat and mtrr independent from each other

On 8/14/2022 9:01 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2022 at 08:08:30AM -0400, Chuck Zmudzinski wrote:
> > On 8/14/2022 5:50 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Sun, Aug 14, 2022 at 05:19:12AM -0400, Chuck Zmudzinski wrote:
> > > > Well, that did not take long. Juergen responded with a message,
> > > > which is encrypted and not delivered to my mailbox because I do not
> > > > have the PGP keys, presumably to make it difficult for me to continue
> > > > the discussion and defend myself after I was accused of violating
> > > > the netiquette rules yesterday by Boris:
> > >
> > > The message was signed, not encrypted.  Odd that your email client could
> > > not read it, perhaps you need to use a different one?
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > >
> > > greg k-h
> > 
> > It's not that my e-mail client could not read it, there is no evidence it
> > was ever sent to me.
>
> The To: line had your address in it, so it was sent to you, and again,
> it was not encrypted as you claimed, but rather just signed to verify he
> was the sender.  That's not making anything difficult for anyone, so I
> think you owe him an apology here, especially as you are asking him to
> do work for you.
>
> best of luck!
>
> greg k-h

Dear Greg,

Thanks for the advice. I appreciate it. Below follows my apology to Juergen and
and Thorsten and some additional comments for anyone willing to hear what
I am trying to say as I continue to try to participate in the discussion of this
regression...

Dear Juergen and Thorsten,

I do apologize since I agree there is not enough evidence to conclude that
Juergen purposely made it difficult for me to respond to and defend myself
against the negative things he said about me in the e-mail I never received
from him.

I am not going to try to defend myself either, since it is not necessary and is
probably an impossible task for me to succeed in defending myself here in
this forum. The e-mail you tried and failed to send to me is currently
publicly available on more than one public mailing lists and it speaks for
itself. Each person who reads it and the other relevant messages in the
thread will decide for himself or herself what that message means.

So far I am inclined to think most people who will even take the time to
read the thread will judge me to be in the wrong, and I also am inclined
to think many who are Cc'd on this thread are already ignoring me
because they consider me to be a total jerk. That's fine, but that's just
their opinion, especially if they base their opinion only on a custom
of hazing users who dare to say what they think on the Linux public
mailing lists.

But since you are the persons who create the Linux kernel, I will express
my opinion that your decision to reject my efforts to help the kernel
developers and maintainers work better together with each other and
with users like me who are brave enough to say what they think on these
public mailing lists is the wrong decision if your goal is really to make
Linux and open source software development able to continue to produce
high quality software that is actually useful to people.

I say that because I am trying to scream to you as loud as I can: "Linux
software is no longer useful to me." No one here seems willing to hear
that message. I wonder if Linus even cares about that anymore. And that is
sad, because Linux was a great project. Unfortunately, now, it is clear to
me it is going to die a slow, painful death. The Linux kernel is a big and
powerful enough project to survive for quite a while, and I probably won't
live to see its death, but unless the people who define the Linux kernel
community change, it will eventually die.

Best regards and good luck to all of you,

Chuck