linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/5] cxl: Avoid to create dax regions for type2 accelerators

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: <87frov6uh7.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 15:48:04 +0800
From: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To: Alejandro Lucero Palau <alucerop@....com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,  Dave Jiang
 <dave.jiang@...el.com>,  <linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>,
  <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,  Gregory Price <gourry@...rry.net>,
  "Davidlohr Bueso" <dave@...olabs.net>,  Jonathan Cameron
 <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>,  Alison Schofield
 <alison.schofield@...el.com>,  Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
  Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,  Ben Cheatham
 <benjamin.cheatham@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] cxl: Avoid to create dax regions for type2
 accelerators

Alejandro Lucero Palau <alucerop@....com> writes:

> On 10/17/24 07:29, Huang, Ying wrote:
>> Hi, Alejandro,
>>
>> Alejandro Lucero Palau <alucerop@....com> writes:
>>
>>> I did comment on this some time ago and I'm doing it again.
>>>
>>>
>>> This is originally part of the type2 patchset, and I'm keeping it in
>>> V4. I do not understand why you pick code changes (you explicitly said
>>> that in the first RFC) from there and use it here, and without
>>> previous discussion about this necessity in the list. I do not think
>>> this is usual, at least in other kernel subsystems I'm more familiar
>>> with, so I will raise this in today's cxl open source collaboration
>>> sync.
>> No.  I picked this change from Dan's series as follows,
>>
>> https://eclists.intel.com/sympa//arc/linux-bkc/2024-10/msg00018.html
>>
>> So, I added co-developed-by and signed-off-by of Dan.
>>
>> IIUC, your picked this change from Dan's series too?
>
>
> Look, this is not going well.
>
>
> You specifically said in your first patchset you considered the type2
> support patchset complete but too large or complex, so you were taking
> parts of it as a prelude for making it easier to review/accept. Just
> face that and not twist the argument.

Although I listed your patchset in my cover letter.  All changes I
picked was from Dan's patchset instead of yours.  And, I kept Dan's
co-developed-by and signed-off-by.  If you will pick changes from Dan,
please do that too.

> FWIW, I'm against you doing so because:
>
>
> 1) You should have commented in the type2 patchset about your concern,
> and gave advice about doing such a prelude (by me) or offer yourself
> for doing it.
>
> 2) Just following your approach, anyone could do the same for any
> patchset sent to the list. This is not a good precedent.
>
> 3) If this is going to be allowed/approved, I'm not going to be
> comfortable within this community. If it is just me, I guess it will
> not be a big loss.
>
>
> None has commented yet except you and me, what I do not know if it is
> because this is a nasty discussion they do not want to get entangle
> with, or because they just think your approach is OK. If not further
> comment and your patchset is accepted, nothing else will be needed to
> say.
>
>
>> Feel free to include this change in your series.  If your patchset is
>> merged firstly, I will rebase on yours and drop this change.
>>
>> [snip]

--
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying