linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs fixes for 6.12-rc2

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: <e3qmolajxidrxkuizuheumydigvzi7qwplggpd2mm2cxwxxzvr@5nkt3ylphmtl>
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2024 19:40:59 -0400
From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs fixes for 6.12-rc2

On Sat, Oct 05, 2024 at 04:15:25PM GMT, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Oct 2024 at 15:54, Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev> wrote:
> >
> > The vast majority of those fixes are all ~2 weeks old.
> 
> With the patches not appearing on the list, that seems entirely irrelevant.
> 
> Apparently they are 2 weeks on IN YOUR TREE.
> 
> And absolutely nowhere else.

If what you want is patches appearing on the list, I'm not unwilling to
make that change.

I take issue, and indeed even dig my heels in, when the only people
asking for that are _only_ yelling about that and aren't involved
otherwise.

But you will find that if you talk to me as one human being to another,
where we can share and listen to each other's concerns, I'm more than
happy to be reasonable.

But I'm not going to just toe the line when it's just yelling.

Seriously.

Because the last time you flipped out over a pull request, I spent the
rest of the cycle telling people "x y and z are fixed, but you'll have
to build my tree instead of running a released kernel". And that gets
tiresome; some of the bugs were significant - and no issues to date have
been found in the stuff you kicked back, which tells me my process is
just fine.

So let _that_ sink in. In order to support my userbase, as well as
iterate to find the _next_ set of bugs, I have to be able to ship
bugfixes in a timely manner, and if that's going to keep being an issue
perhaps I should be having those conversations with distro kernel
maintainers now, instead of later.

> > Let that sink in.
> 
> Seriously.
> 
> You completely dodged my actual argument, except for pointing at how
> we didn't have process two decades ago.
> 
> If you can't actually even face this, what's the point any more?

Face _what_ exactly? Because at this point, I can't even tell what it is
you want, what you're reacting to keeps shifting.