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  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]
Date:	Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:48:26 +0400
From:	Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	<kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<paul@...lmenage.org>, <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
	<ebiederm@...ssion.com>, <gthelen@...gle.com>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	<kirill@...temov.name>, <avagin@...allels.com>, <devel@...nvz.org>,
	<eric.dumazet@...il.com>, <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 0/9] Request for inclusion: per-cgroup tcp memory pressure
 controls

On 12/15/2011 09:48 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki<kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:40:19 +0900
>
>> I met this bug at _1st_ run. Please enable _all_ debug options!.
>
> Plus the CONFIG_NET=n and other build failures.
>
> This patch series was seriously rushed, and very poorly handled.
>
> Yet I kept getting so much pressure to review, comment upon, and
> ultimately apply these patches.  Never, ever, do this to me ever
> again.
>
> If I don't feel your patches are high priority enough or ready enough
> for me to review, then TOO BAD.  Don't ask people to pressure me or
> get my attention.  Instead, ask others for help and do testing before
> wasting MY time and crapping up MY tree.
>
> I should have noticed a red flag when I have James Bottomly asking me
> to look at these patches, I should have pushed back.  Instead, I
> relented, and now I'm very seriously regretting it.
>
> All the regressions in the net-next tree over the past several days
> have been due to this patch set, and this patch set alone.
>
> This code wasn't ready and needed, at a minimum, several more weeks of
> work before being put in.
>
> Instead, we're going to bandaid patch it up after the fact, rather
> than just letting these changes mature naturally during the review
> process.
Hi Dave,

You are right about all points. I will admit to it, face it, and 
apologize it.
I guess the best I can do right now is fix whatever you guys point me to 
and not repeat it in the future.

Thanks
--
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists