linux-kernel - Re: (subset) [PATCH 22/32] vfs: inode cache conversion to hash-bl

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: <CAGudoHEw+JRNB_qfdam2LM-3KLWiQu369ewQFO=hnpQ7qALmbA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 31 Oct 2023 12:31:38 +0100
From:   Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>
To:     Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc:     Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org,
        Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: (subset) [PATCH 22/32] vfs: inode cache conversion to hash-bl

On 10/31/23, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org> wrote:
>> The follow up including a statement about "being arsed" once more was
>> to Christian, not you and was rather "tongue in cheek".
>
> Fyi, I can't be arsed to be talked to like that.
>

Maybe there is a language or cultural barrier at play here and the
above comes off to you as inflammatory.

I assumed the tone here is rather informal. For example here is an
excerpt from your response to me in another thread:
> You're all driving me nuts. ;)

I assumed this was not a serious statement and the "being arsed" thing
was written by me in the same spirit. I find it surprising there is a
strong reaction to it, but I can only explain why.

All that said, I have some patches I intend to submit in the
foreseeable future. I am going to make sure to stick to more
professional tone.

>> Whether the patch is ready for reviews and whatnot is your call to
>> make as the author.
>
> This is basically why that patch never staid in -next. Dave said this
> patch is meaningless without his other patchs and I had no reason to
> doubt that claim nor currently the cycles to benchmark and disprove it.
>

That makes sense, thanks.

-- 
Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik gmail.com>