linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/40] Memory allocation profiling

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:   Wed, 03 May 2023 11:49:23 -0400
From:   James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To:     Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
Cc:     Petr Tesařík <petr@...arici.cz>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, vbabka@...e.cz, hannes@...xchg.org,
        roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, mgorman@...e.de, dave@...olabs.net,
        willy@...radead.org, liam.howlett@...cle.com, corbet@....net,
        void@...ifault.com, peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
        ldufour@...ux.ibm.com, catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org,
        arnd@...db.de, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, peterx@...hat.com,
        david@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk, mcgrof@...nel.org,
        masahiroy@...nel.org, nathan@...nel.org, dennis@...nel.org,
        tj@...nel.org, muchun.song@...ux.dev, rppt@...nel.org,
        paulmck@...nel.org, pasha.tatashin@...een.com,
        yosryahmed@...gle.com, yuzhao@...gle.com, dhowells@...hat.com,
        hughd@...gle.com, andreyknvl@...il.com, keescook@...omium.org,
        ndesaulniers@...gle.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        ebiggers@...gle.com, ytcoode@...il.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
        dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
        bristot@...hat.com, vschneid@...hat.com, cl@...ux.com,
        penberg@...nel.org, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, 42.hyeyoo@...il.com,
        glider@...gle.com, elver@...gle.com, dvyukov@...gle.com,
        shakeelb@...gle.com, songmuchun@...edance.com, jbaron@...mai.com,
        rientjes@...gle.com, minchan@...gle.com, kaleshsingh@...gle.com,
        kernel-team@...roid.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
        kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/40] Memory allocation profiling

On Wed, 2023-05-03 at 11:28 -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Wed, May 03, 2023 at 08:33:48AM -0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Wed, 2023-05-03 at 05:57 -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 03, 2023 at 11:50:51AM +0200, Petr Tesařík wrote:
> > > > If anyone ever wants to use this code tagging framework for
> > > > something else, they will also have to convert relevant
> > > > functions to macros, slowly changing the kernel to a minefield
> > > > where local identifiers, struct, union and enum tags, field
> > > > names and labels must avoid name conflict with a tagged
> > > > function. For now, I have to remember that alloc_pages is
> > > > forbidden, but the list may grow.
> > > 
> > > Also, since you're not actually a kernel contributor yet...
> > 
> > You have an amazing talent for being wrong.  But even if you were
> > actually right about this, it would be an ad hominem personal
> > attack on a new contributor which crosses the line into
> > unacceptable behaviour on the list and runs counter to our code of
> > conduct.
> 
> ...Err, what? That was intended _in no way_ as a personal attack.

Your reply went on to say "If you're going to comment, please do the
necessary work to make sure you're saying something that makes sense."
That is a personal attack belittling the person involved and holding
them up for general contempt on the mailing list.  This is exactly how
we should *not* treat newcomers.

> If I was mistaken I do apologize, but lately I've run across quite a
> lot of people offering review feedback to patches I post that turn
> out to have 0 or 10 patches in the kernel, and - to be blunt - a
> pattern of offering feedback in strong language with a presumption of
> experience that takes a lot to respond to adequately on a technical
> basis.

A synopsis of the feedback is that using macros to attach trace tags
pollutes the global function namespace of the kernel.  That's a valid
observation and merits a technical not a personal response.

James