From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ADE5C2D0FB for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 01:20:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19972206D3 for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 01:20:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732081AbgEMBUw (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2020 21:20:52 -0400 Received: from kvm5.telegraphics.com.au ([98.124.60.144]:48866 "EHLO kvm5.telegraphics.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731604AbgEMBUv (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2020 21:20:51 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by kvm5.telegraphics.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id F311729CEA; Tue, 12 May 2020 21:14:48 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 11:14:56 +1000 (AEST) From: Finn Thain To: Markus Elfring cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Christophe Jaillet Subject: Re: net/sonic: Fix some resource leaks in error handling paths In-Reply-To: <3fabce05-7da9-7daa-d92c-411369f35b4a@web.de> Message-ID: References: <9d279f21-6172-5318-4e29-061277e82157@web.de> <9994a7de-0399-fb34-237a-a3c71b3cf568@web.de> <3fabce05-7da9-7daa-d92c-411369f35b4a@web.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 12 May 2020, Markus Elfring wrote: > > Markus, if you were to write a patch to improve upon coding-style.rst, > > who should review it? > > All involved contributors have got chances to provide constructive > comments. But how could someone be elevated to "involved contributor" if their patches were to be blocked by arbitrary application of the rules? > I would be curious who will actually dare to contribute further ideas > for this area. > You seem to be uniquely positioned to do that, if only because you cited rules which don't appear to support your objection. > > > If you are unable to write or review such a patch, how can you hope to > > adjudicate compliance? > > I can also try to achieve more improvements here to see how the > available software documentation will evolve. > When the people who write and review the coding standards are the same people who write and review the code, the standards devolve (given the prevailing incentives). > Regards, > Markus > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Finn Thain Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 01:14:56 +0000 Subject: Re: net/sonic: Fix some resource leaks in error handling paths Message-Id: List-Id: References: <9d279f21-6172-5318-4e29-061277e82157@web.de> <9994a7de-0399-fb34-237a-a3c71b3cf568@web.de> <3fabce05-7da9-7daa-d92c-411369f35b4a@web.de> In-Reply-To: <3fabce05-7da9-7daa-d92c-411369f35b4a@web.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Markus Elfring Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Christophe Jaillet On Tue, 12 May 2020, Markus Elfring wrote: > > Markus, if you were to write a patch to improve upon coding-style.rst, > > who should review it? > > All involved contributors have got chances to provide constructive > comments. But how could someone be elevated to "involved contributor" if their patches were to be blocked by arbitrary application of the rules? > I would be curious who will actually dare to contribute further ideas > for this area. > You seem to be uniquely positioned to do that, if only because you cited rules which don't appear to support your objection. > > > If you are unable to write or review such a patch, how can you hope to > > adjudicate compliance? > > I can also try to achieve more improvements here to see how the > available software documentation will evolve. > When the people who write and review the coding standards are the same people who write and review the code, the standards devolve (given the prevailing incentives). > Regards, > Markus >