archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg KH <>
To: Aditya Pakki <>
Cc: Leon Romanovsky <>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <>,
	Chuck Lever <>,
	Trond Myklebust <>,
	Anna Schumaker <>,
	"David S. Miller" <>,
	Jakub Kicinski <>,
	Dave Wysochanski <>,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SUNRPC: Add a check for gss_release_msg
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 10:15:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YH/fM/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

Q: Were do I find info about this thing called top-posting?
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

A: No.
Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?

On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 02:56:27AM -0500, Aditya Pakki wrote:
> Greg,
> I respectfully ask you to cease and desist from making wild accusations
> that are bordering on slander.
> These patches were sent as part of a new static analyzer that I wrote and
> it's sensitivity is obviously not great. I sent patches on the hopes to get
> feedback. We are not experts in the linux kernel and repeatedly making
> these statements is disgusting to hear.
> Obviously, it is a wrong step but your preconceived biases are so strong
> that you make allegations without merit nor give us any benefit of doubt.
> I will not be sending any more patches due to the attitude that is not only
> unwelcome but also intimidating to newbies and non experts.

You, and your group, have publicly admitted to sending known-buggy
patches to see how the kernel community would react to them, and
published a paper based on that work.

Now you submit a new series of obviously-incorrect patches again, so
what am I supposed to think of such a thing?

They obviously were _NOT_ created by a static analysis tool that is of
any intelligence, as they all are the result of totally different
patterns, and all of which are obviously not even fixing anything at
all.  So what am I supposed to think here, other than that you and your
group are continuing to experiment on the kernel community developers by
sending such nonsense patches?

When submitting patches created by a tool, everyone who does so submits
them with wording like "found by tool XXX, we are not sure if this is
correct or not, please advise." which is NOT what you did here at all.
You were not asking for help, you were claiming that these were
legitimate fixes, which you KNEW to be incorrect.

A few minutes with anyone with the semblance of knowledge of C can see
that your submissions do NOT do anything at all, so to think that a tool
created them, and then that you thought they were a valid "fix" is
totally negligent on your part, not ours.  You are the one at fault, it
is not our job to be the test subjects of a tool you create.

Our community welcomes developers who wish to help and enhance Linux.
That is NOT what you are attempting to do here, so please do not try to
frame it that way.

Our community does not appreciate being experimented on, and being
"tested" by submitting known patches that are either do nothing on
purpose, or introduce bugs on purpose.  If you wish to do work like
this, I suggest you find a different community to run your experiments
on, you are not welcome here.

Because of this, I will now have to ban all future contributions from
your University and rip out your previous contributions, as they were
obviously submitted in bad-faith with the intent to cause problems.


greg k-h

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-04-21  8:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-07  0:16 [PATCH] SUNRPC: Add a check for gss_release_msg Aditya Pakki
2021-04-07 15:34 ` J. Bruce Fields
2021-04-08 15:01 ` Trond Myklebust
2021-04-08 15:24   ` Olga Kornievskaia
2021-04-08 16:02     ` Trond Myklebust
2021-04-20  7:15 ` Greg KH
2021-04-20 17:10   ` J. Bruce Fields
2021-04-21  5:10     ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-04-21  5:43       ` Greg KH
2021-04-21  6:08         ` Leon Romanovsky
     [not found]         ` <>
2021-04-21  8:15           ` Greg KH [this message]
2021-04-21 10:07         ` Sudip Mukherjee
2021-04-21 10:21           ` Greg KH
2021-04-21 11:58             ` Shelat, Abhi
2021-04-21 12:08               ` Greg KH
2021-04-21 12:19               ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-04-21 13:11                 ` Trond Myklebust
2021-04-21 13:20                   ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-04-21 13:42                     ` Steven Rostedt
2021-04-21 13:21                   ` gregkh
2021-04-21 13:34                     ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-04-21 13:50                       ` gregkh
2021-04-21 14:12                         ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-04-21 18:50                         ` Alexander Grund
2021-04-21 13:37               ` J. Bruce Fields
2021-04-21 13:49                 ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-04-21 13:56                   ` J. Bruce Fields
2021-04-22 19:39                     ` J. Bruce Fields
2021-04-23 17:25                       ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-04-23 18:07                         ` J. Bruce Fields
2021-04-23 19:29                           ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-04-23 21:48                             ` J. Bruce Fields
2021-04-24  7:21                               ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-04-24 18:34                               ` Al Viro
2021-04-24 21:34                                 ` J. Bruce Fields
2021-04-25  0:41                                   ` Theodore Ts'o
2021-04-25  6:29                                     ` Greg KH
     [not found]                                       ` <>
2021-04-26 13:47                                         ` J. Bruce Fields
2021-04-22  8:10             ` Sudip Mukherjee
2021-04-22  8:27               ` Greg KH
2021-04-21 12:51       ` Anna Schumaker
2021-04-21 14:15         ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-04-21 15:48           ` Theodore Ts'o
2021-04-21 17:34             ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-22  3:57               ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-04-21 22:52 ` Guenter Roeck
     [not found] <>
2021-04-21 19:49 ` Theodore Ts'o
2021-04-22  7:50   ` Eric Biggers
2021-04-21 20:27 Weikeng Chen

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:

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

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=YH/fM/ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

* 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).