linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Patch review challenges

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

Message-ID: <20240621082114.GH1318296@google.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 09:21:14 +0100
From: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc: lkp@...el.com, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-media@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
	linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org, Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
	Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>,
	Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
	Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
	Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
	oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Patch review challenges

On Fri, 21 Jun 2024, Markus Elfring wrote:

> > The issue is one of communication and the way reviews are conducted.
> >
> > Reviewing other people's work is challenging and requires a certain
> > skill-set, of which _excellent_ communication skills are non-negotiable.
> 
> Patch feedback and change tolerance can vary also according to involved communities.

Agreed.

For this community, I suggest you build your skills for a while longer.

> > Why not concentrate on more complex submissions for a while and grow
> > your repertoire of common review points,
> 
> Further collateral evolution can be considered there depending on
> corresponding development resources.
> 
> > rather than repeating the same few over and over?
> 
> Some factors are probably known also according to corresponding statistics.
> Several contributors are stumbling on recurring improvement possibilities
> in published information.

Right, this will always be true, however the few you've picked up on
are not important enough to keep reiterating.  By doing so, you're
receiving undesirable attention.

> > Reading other, more experienced maintainer's reviews would also be a good use
> > of your time.
> 
> I am trying to influence adjustments in desirable directions for a while.

Never stop trying to improve.


These are only my opinions of course.  Take the advice or leave it.

There's no need to reply to this.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]