netdev - Re: [RFT 2/4] Add mod_timer

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: <20090218.140455.142445208.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 18 Feb 2009 14:04:55 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	mingo@...e.hu
Cc:	shemminger@...tta.com, kaber@...sh.net, rick.jones2@...com,
	dada1@...mosbay.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	gandalf@...g.westbo.se, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFT 2/4] Add mod_timer_noact

From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:51:40 +0100

> Anyway, it's all handled, you just need to read the rest of the 
> thread.

I did read the entire thread before replying, my objection
to your original posting still standed.

And as others have pointed out you also failed to recognize
the context of the patch posting.  It was part of a sequence
of patches for people to test some experimental netfilter
performance optimizations.  "RFT" was prefixed to every patch
subject line, if any more indication was necessary.

Yet you object that the patches are against the networking
and netfilter trees.

Again, your reactions were knee-jerk, by every definition of the
term.

I know how you work Ingo, you want to be fast and efficient.
But often, your "fast and efficient" is "careless", and this
wastes everyone elses time and in the final analysis makes
you "slow".
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html