linux-kernel - RE: [v2 PATCH] arm64: dts: stratix10: add new compatible for Intel SoCFPGA Stratix10 platform

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

Message-ID: <PH0PR11MB51911D9FF0CB5290370D4BDFF13FA@PH0PR11MB5191.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Fri, 21 Jul 2023 09:58:14 +0000
From:   "Li, Meng" <Meng.Li@...driver.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        "dinguyen@...nel.org" <dinguyen@...nel.org>,
        "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org" 
        <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        "conor+dt@...nel.org" <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [v2 PATCH] arm64: dts: stratix10: add new compatible for Intel
 SoCFPGA Stratix10 platform



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
> Sent: Friday, July 21, 2023 5:36 PM
> To: Li, Meng <Meng.Li@...driver.com>; dinguyen@...nel.org;
> robh+dt@...nel.org; krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org; conor+dt@...nel.org;
> devicetree@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH] arm64: dts: stratix10: add new compatible for Intel
> SoCFPGA Stratix10 platform
> 
> CAUTION: This email comes from a non Wind River email account!
> Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and
> know the content is safe.
> 
> On 21/07/2023 11:29, Li, Meng wrote:
> >>>>>> NAK, don't fake reviews. This very impolite and destroys entire trust.
> >>>>>> The model of upstream collaboration depends on the trust, which
> >>>>>> is now gone for Windriver.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No! I don't fake a tag.
> >>>>
> >>>> Really? Then I ask second time - from where did you get it? Provide a link.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230718030851.2014306-1-Meng.Li@windri
> >>> ve
> >>> r.com/T/
> >>
> >> So where is it? You pointed to your email. Where is the tag?
> >>
> >
> > Sorry! Maybe I have wrong understanding about TAG.
> > From my perspective, If reviewers ask question or give some advices to the
> patch, I need to add the tag to v2.
> 
> This is some crazy idea. So you want to sprinkle some tags, just because
> someone disagrees with your patch and explicitly gives you a NAK, which means
> NOT-Ack, Not-acknowledge, not accepted, not in good shape.
> 
> I actually wonder why adding an acknowledging tag for the patch, if I disagreed
> and gave you NAK. Following your logic, this should be a NAK tag. This I could
> understand. But giving acknowledge when I clearly said patch is wrong?
> 

Very sorry for wasting your time because of lack of understanding about upstream rules.
And thanks for many explanations patiently, this will help me make progress.

> Read all process documents before submitting new patches:
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/
> 

Ok! I will check these docs.

Thanks,
Limeng

> > If it is not allowed, I apologize for that.
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof