linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH] fs/pipe: Introduce a check to skip sleeping processes during pipe read/write

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20241225165638.GA12343@1wt.eu>
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2024 17:56:38 +0100
From: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To: WangYuli <wangyuli@...ontech.com>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
        brauner@...nel.org, jack@...e.cz, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH] fs/pipe: Introduce a check to skip sleeping
 processes during pipe read/write

On Thu, Dec 26, 2024 at 12:32:35AM +0800, WangYuli wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I've reviewed the Contributor Covenant and the Linux Kernel Contributor
> Covenant Code of Conduct Interpretation, and I couldn't find anything
> suggesting that CCing a large number of people is "unfriendly".

This is unrelated, it's a matter of basic social interactions and respect
of others' time.

> And while I don't believe my actions were malicious, I understand your
> concern.
> 
> Going forward, I'll be more considerate of the recipients when sending
> emails and will avoid CCing more than a hundred people at once in similar
> situations.

"More than a hundred" ? Are you serious ? For what purpose ? I'll explain
you something related to how people consume e-mails: the first thing they
do if they hesitate to process it is to check if someone else in the To
or Cc is more knowledgeable or legitimate than them. If so they often
prefer to let others deal with it. With such a large list, it's impossible
to check all other addresses and virtually *everyone* will consider that
surely one of the hundreds of others is more legitimate. So the more people
you add, the less likely anyone will handle your request.

The common rules that apply here are not made out of nowhere but based on
what works best. Just send to the most relevant outputs of get_maintainer,
wait for one week and if you get no response it's just that these people
were busy and forgot about you, so just kindly ping again to make sure
your message was received. With such a large community it's normal to lose
some messages, and pinging again is normally not considered as an offence
so that's fine. If you get no response after multiple attempts, it might
mean there's something annoying in your message (like sending to tens or
hundreds of people at once).

And really, when a script tells you "send your message to these 3 people"
and you send it to 191, how can you imagine the recipients will think
anything different from "this person feels super important to spam
everyone like this". Why would they even respond if they feel like you
consider you have the right to spam everyone in hope to get your orders
processed immediately ? I'm pretty sure that the majority will just let
it rot by principle.

Good luck,
Willy