linux-kernel - Re: [v6 17/20] ARM: dts: aspeed: Add IBM Huygens BMC system

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: <8a92a08c-2a57-454d-a7ff-3edb3528b78e@web.de>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 08:38:08 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, linux-fsi@...ts.ozlabs.org,
 linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
 kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Eddie James <eajames@...ux.ibm.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>,
 Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...econstruct.com.au>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
 Lakshmi Yadlapati <lakshmiy@...ibm.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
 Ninad Palsule <ninad@...ux.ibm.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [v6 17/20] ARM: dts: aspeed: Add IBM Huygens BMC system

>> Why do you interpret my patch review contributions in this direction
>> when the official Linux development documentation provides special advice
>> on affected wording details?
>
> Your "contributions" are garbage in general,

My contributions are also varying (as usual) through the years.


>                                              and this thread is not an exception.

It is just another example for involved communication challenges.


> More specifically, you are picking an advice

Some development activities are reminders according to known information sources.


>                                              that is inapplicable,
> transforming it into a question and "contributing" the result.
>
> And your entire modus operandi fits that pattern - you spew random garbage and
> expect the contributors to spend their time and efforts on checking if your
> (contents-free) "advice" happens to make any sense.

Do you express special concerns here which can be reconsidered because of
advices and requirements from software development guidelines?


…
>                           Unfortunately, the kernel development is clearly
> not among those.

How does such a view fit to an other data representation?
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/log/?qt=author&q=Elfring

Regards,
Markus