[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKPOu+8wK16XWCx1+7801tyE66uLBu79CySLFetCWbS3TnH3bQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2025 11:45:28 +0200
From: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@...os.com>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, Kiryl Shutsemau <kirill@...temov.name>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
axelrasmussen@...gle.com, yuanchu@...gle.com, willy@...radead.org,
hughd@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com,
rppt@...nel.org, surenb@...gle.com, vishal.moola@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/12] mm/shmem: add `const` to lots of pointer parameters
On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 11:32 AM Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz> wrote:
> > Sure, but first I need to know what is really needed. Reviews on LKML
> > are often contradictory, and it's easy to get pushed around from one
> > corner to the next.
> >
> > I just posted v4 with longer commit messages. I think that's a lot of
> > unnecessary noise that takes a lot of time to read, but oh well, if
> > that's what you guys really want...
>
> No I don't think we want a passive-aggressive malicious compliance.
What the .....
Your response is similar to what I mean with "getting pushed around".
You guys insist on verbose commit messages, or else it won't get
merged, you say. I don't agree, but when I yield to your requirements,
take the time to implement them, I get accused of being
"passive-aggressive" and "malicious".
Please be more respectful when handling code submissions.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists