All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net, sashal@kernel.org,
	ben@decadent.org.uk, tglx@linutronix.de, labbott@redhat.com,
	andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, tsoni@codeaurora.org,
	keescook@chromium.org, tony.luck@intel.com,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] Documentation/process: soften language around conference talk dates
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:49:58 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190911154958.GB14152@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190910172651.D9F5C062@viggo.jf.intel.com>

On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 10:26:51AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> 
> From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
> 
> Both hardware companies and the kernel community prefer coordinated
> disclosure to the alternatives.  It is also obvious that sitting on
> ready-to-go mitigations for months is not so nice for kernel
> maintainers.
> 
> I want to ensure that the patched text can not be read as "the kernel
> does not wait for conference dates".  I'm also fairly sure that, so
> far, we *have* waited for a number of conference dates.

We have been "forced" to wait for conference dates.  That is much
different from what we are saying here (i.e. we do NOT want to have to
wait for that type of thing as that causes us all real work that is a
total waste of engineering effort.)

> Change the text to make it clear that waiting for conference dates
> is possible, but keep the grumbling about it being a burden.

I don't think we want that, waiting for long periods of time like we
have been (and are currently) is a royal pain.  We are glad to take
these on a case-by-case basis, but doing delays for no other reason than
a specific conference date 6 months in the future when we have fixes now
benifits no one at all, and in fact HURTS everyone involved, including
our users the most.

> While I think this is good for everyone, this patch represents my
> personal opinion and not that of my employer.

I appreciate the disclaimer :)

I know Thomas and others are totally busy with Plumbers right now (as am
I), so I'll hold on to this and your next patch in my "to-review" queue
to give others a chance to weigh in on the tweaks to see if anyone
disagrees with my comments above.

thanks,

greg k-h

  reply	other threads:[~2019-09-11 15:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-10 17:26 [PATCH 0/4] Documentation/process: embargoed hardware issues additions Dave Hansen
2019-09-10 17:26 ` [PATCH 1/4] Documentation/process: Volunteer as the ambassador for Intel Dave Hansen
2019-09-10 17:26 ` [PATCH 2/4] Documentation/process: describe relaxing disclosing party NDAs Dave Hansen
2019-09-11 10:11   ` Sasha Levin
2019-09-11 14:11     ` Dave Hansen
2019-09-11 15:44   ` Greg KH
2019-09-11 16:09     ` Dave Hansen
2019-09-25  8:29       ` [PATCH] Documentation/process: Clarify disclosure rules Thomas Gleixner
2019-09-25 15:53         ` Dave Hansen
2019-09-29 10:42       ` [PATCH 2/4] Documentation/process: describe relaxing disclosing party NDAs Greg KH
2019-09-10 17:26 ` [PATCH 3/4] Documentation/process: soften language around conference talk dates Dave Hansen
2019-09-11 15:49   ` Greg KH [this message]
2019-09-10 17:26 ` [PATCH 4/4] Documentation/process: add transparency promise to list subscription Dave Hansen
2019-09-11 15:51   ` Greg KH
2019-09-16  8:30     ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-09-11 11:54 ` [PATCH 0/4] Documentation/process: embargoed hardware issues additions Greg KH

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190911154958.GB14152@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=ben@decadent.org.uk \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=labbott@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashal@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=tsoni@codeaurora.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.