* [craigl@promise.com: Getting A Patch Into The Kernel] (fwd) @ 2001-06-13 6:22 Andre Hedrick 2001-06-13 6:43 ` bert hubert 2001-06-13 9:10 ` Arjan van de Ven 0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Andre Hedrick @ 2001-06-13 6:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Craig Lyons; +Cc: linux-kernel Mr. Craig Lyons, I do not want or need your company's patches, period. I will not take or accept or approve of any dirty code that allows the a poorly written binary driver that can not control its ISR and it interferes irresponsiblily with the native ATA driver. These are the words from your dear "Linus Chen". Oh answer your voice mail, I left you a message. Regards, Andre Hedrick Linux ATA Development ----- Forwarded message from Craig Lyons <craigl@promise.com> ----- X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <005101c0f38f$e2000960$bd01a8c0@promise.com> From: "Craig Lyons" <craigl@promise.com> Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 15:34:43 -0700 To: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Getting A Patch Into The Kernel Importance: Normal Hello, My name is Craig Lyons and I am the marketing manager at Promise Technology. We have a question and are hoping you can point us in the right direction. In the 2.4 kernel there is support for some of our products (Ultra 66, Ultra 100, etc.). As you may or may not know, our Ultra family of controllers (which are just standard IDE controllers and do not have RAID) use the same ASIC on them as our FastTrak RAID controllers do. The 2.4 kernel will recognize our Ultra family of controllers, but there is a problem in that a FastTrak will not be recognized as a FastTrak, but as an Ultra. Consequently, the array on the FastTrak is not recognized as an array, but instead each disk is seen individually, and the users data cannot be properly accessed. We have a patch that fixes this and are wondering if it is possible to get this patch into the kernel, and if so, how this would be done? I apologize if this is the incorrect e-mail to be making this request to. If this is not the correct address to be posting this message, any assistance as to where it should be directed would be greatly appreciated. Regards, Craig Craig Lyons Marketing Manager Promise Technology 1460 Koll Circle San Jose, CA 95112 USA Voice - 408-452-0948 ext. 241 Fax - 408-452-1534 craigl@promise.com http:\\www.promise.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [craigl@promise.com: Getting A Patch Into The Kernel] (fwd) 2001-06-13 6:22 [craigl@promise.com: Getting A Patch Into The Kernel] (fwd) Andre Hedrick @ 2001-06-13 6:43 ` bert hubert 2001-06-13 7:06 ` Andre Hedrick 2001-06-13 9:10 ` Arjan van de Ven 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: bert hubert @ 2001-06-13 6:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andre Hedrick; +Cc: Craig Lyons, linux-kernel On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 11:22:56PM -0700, Andre Hedrick wrote: > I do not want or need your company's patches, period. That's just not true and you know it. If the patches were to be written in cooperation with you and of proper quality and license you would love them. > I will not take or accept or approve of any dirty code that allows the a > poorly written binary driver that can not control its ISR and it > interferes irresponsiblily with the native ATA driver. That's the real issue of course. Craig contacted you to find out what was wrong and you should explain to him what the problems are, and how he could solve them. Linus would accept patches written by Bill Gates if they were licensed right and coded properly, so I don't see why Promise should be an exception. Never get angry at bad code. Only explain people why it's bad. At length if needed. Craig: > instead each disk is seen individually, and the users data cannot be > properly accessed. We have a patch that fixes this and are wondering if it > is possible to get this patch into the kernel, and if so, how this would be > done? The procedure is to publish the patch publically and have people comment and try it. They will often find that your code is not up to par or does things in ways that do not please the kernel people. No evil is intended, it is just that the kernel developers are a choosy bunch. But given the right prodding they will tell you how you could change your code so that it is acceptable. Alternatively, people here might see what needs to be done from your patch, and do it themselves. > I apologize if this is the incorrect e-mail to be making this request to. If > this is not the correct address to be posting this message, any assistance > as to where it should be directed would be greatly appreciated. This was definitely the right email address :-) Mr Hedrick appears not to like your work and as he is prone to do, he explained so graphically. This happens. The main thing is to approach kernel coders from a technical standpoint - they are not interested in commercial pressures or deadlines. Get your technical people to talk to 'our' technical people and make sure that they realise that it should be done 'our way' (as it is 'our code') and things will go swimmingly. > http:\\www.promise.com Reversing those backslashes might aid your credibility here :-) If you ever feel that you don't understand these strange linux people, please contact me or some other people. It can be a weird country, especially coming from a marketing devision. Thanks for trying! But do understand that no amount of prodding, cajoling or legal pressure will get any company anywhere. That's just not the way. As we say "It's the code, stupid!". Good luck! Regards, bert hubert > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > -- http://www.PowerDNS.com Versatile DNS Services Trilab The Technology People 'SYN! .. SYN|ACK! .. ACK!' - the mating call of the internet ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [craigl@promise.com: Getting A Patch Into The Kernel] (fwd) 2001-06-13 6:43 ` bert hubert @ 2001-06-13 7:06 ` Andre Hedrick 2001-06-13 10:51 ` Rob Landley 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Andre Hedrick @ 2001-06-13 7:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bert hubert; +Cc: Craig Lyons, linux-kernel No I would not take their code and apply it. I might not even want to look at it. All I want is the API rules to the signatures and we have them now. We do not need their driver. Next insults to linux in this form are unacceptable means of communication. ********* This support will also include a version of our FastCheck utility for X-Windows. To start we will only support distribution versions of the kernel. No test or beta kernels will be supported at this time. Promise realizes that support could have come much sooner but as I started earlier we are much more concerned with compatibility and quality rather than rushing support to the market at the expense of the end user. Hopefully this answers you immediate questions about our Linux support structure. ********* Stating/Implying that Linux Maintainers do not care about "quality". Oh it gets much worse, but I want to see if the sales for Promise have hit hard enough to break their linux-unfriendly additude. Mind you the came begging for help because their sales are off, and I was willing to help on the terms of GPL/GNU and mine. But GPL/GNU was to big to choke down. When the sales hurt enough and they have not choice, I will reconsider. Breathe, because you die before I change my position, if you are hold a breath. I do not trust Promise, and three years of their general arrogance is more than enough. Mind you that at one point I had two people in the San Jose office that were friendly be they are now gone. They got to close to GPL/GNU and something happened. Regards, Andre Hedrick Linux ATA Development On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, bert hubert wrote: > On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 11:22:56PM -0700, Andre Hedrick wrote: > > > I do not want or need your company's patches, period. > > That's just not true and you know it. If the patches were to be written in > cooperation with you and of proper quality and license you would love them. > > > I will not take or accept or approve of any dirty code that allows the a > > poorly written binary driver that can not control its ISR and it > > interferes irresponsiblily with the native ATA driver. > > That's the real issue of course. Craig contacted you to find out what was > wrong and you should explain to him what the problems are, and how he could > solve them. Linus would accept patches written by Bill Gates if they were > licensed right and coded properly, so I don't see why Promise should be an > exception. > > Never get angry at bad code. Only explain people why it's bad. At length if > needed. > > Craig: > > > instead each disk is seen individually, and the users data cannot be > > properly accessed. We have a patch that fixes this and are wondering if it > > is possible to get this patch into the kernel, and if so, how this would be > > done? > > The procedure is to publish the patch publically and have people comment and > try it. They will often find that your code is not up to par or does things > in ways that do not please the kernel people. No evil is intended, it is > just that the kernel developers are a choosy bunch. But given the right > prodding they will tell you how you could change your code so that it is > acceptable. Alternatively, people here might see what needs to be done from > your patch, and do it themselves. > > > I apologize if this is the incorrect e-mail to be making this request to. If > > this is not the correct address to be posting this message, any assistance > > as to where it should be directed would be greatly appreciated. > > This was definitely the right email address :-) Mr Hedrick appears not to > like your work and as he is prone to do, he explained so graphically. This > happens. The main thing is to approach kernel coders from a technical > standpoint - they are not interested in commercial pressures or deadlines. > Get your technical people to talk to 'our' technical people and make sure > that they realise that it should be done 'our way' (as it is 'our code') > and things will go swimmingly. > > > http:\\www.promise.com > > Reversing those backslashes might aid your credibility here :-) If you ever > feel that you don't understand these strange linux people, please contact me > or some other people. It can be a weird country, especially coming from a > marketing devision. Thanks for trying! > > But do understand that no amount of prodding, cajoling or legal pressure > will get any company anywhere. That's just not the way. As we say "It's the > code, stupid!". Good luck! > > Regards, > > bert hubert > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > > > > -- > http://www.PowerDNS.com Versatile DNS Services > Trilab The Technology People > 'SYN! .. SYN|ACK! .. ACK!' - the mating call of the internet ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [craigl@promise.com: Getting A Patch Into The Kernel] (fwd) 2001-06-13 7:06 ` Andre Hedrick @ 2001-06-13 10:51 ` Rob Landley 2001-06-13 17:57 ` Andre Hedrick 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Rob Landley @ 2001-06-13 10:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andre Hedrick, bert hubert; +Cc: Craig Lyons, linux-kernel On Wednesday 13 June 2001 03:06, Andre Hedrick wrote: > No I would not take their code and apply it. > I might not even want to look at it. Well, you're maintainer and I'm obviously not, but it's nice to hear you've kept an open mind on this issue. :) > All I want is the API rules to the signatures and we have them now. > > We do not need their driver. Reinventing the wheel can be fun. Richard Stallman's been doing that for years since he refuses to take any patch where he can't physically track down the author and make them sign a piece of paper handing the copyright over to the Free Software Foundation. (He's got a file cabinet full of them so he'll have unassailable standing in case he ever has to sue anybody to enforce the GPL on GNU code.) Of course the unfortunate side effect of this is that the GNU project stalled in the late 1980's, and this whole "Linux" think forked off of it and took over instead, in large part because there was just too much friction getting patches through the maintainer bottleneck, while Linus would accept anything from anybody. (Linus sucked all the developers away from comp.os.minix for the same reason.) But oh well. > Next insults to linux in this form are unacceptable means of > communication. > ... insult omitted > > Stating/Implying that Linux Maintainers do not care about "quality". "Quality" is a loaded word in marketing circles, due to ISO nine zillion and the sickening-sigma stuff and all that. I always think of it in terms of "the most prominent qualities of this product are that it smells bad and tends to explode without warning. Now wrap that up in flowers and make it sound good." And off the marketing droids go... You are aware that you were speaking to a marketing person from Promise, correct? (He admitted it and everything. We didn't even have to use thumbscrews. Kind of a waste to get them all out and oiled and everything in that case...) > Oh it gets much worse, but I want to see if the sales for Promise have hit > hard enough to break their linux-unfriendly additude. The dude came hat in hand into the linux-kernel mailing list asking how he could play nice with us, (apparently honestly not knowing,) and you bit his head off. I don't think sales have hit hard enough to overcome THAT just yet. But I could be wrong... > Mind you the came begging for help because their sales are off, and I was > willing to help on the terms of GPL/GNU and mine. But GPL/GNU was to big > to choke down. Okay, THERE is the problem. Halfway through the message. Why not start with that next time? If the problem is that the code will not be made available under the GPL, then of course that IS an insurmountable problem for getting it included in the kernel. But it's entirely possible that our marketing friend didn't know that. It's entirely possible he doesn't know what the GPL -IS-. (If you've been sharing a private conversation with him that hasn't been CC'd to the list, than obviously I could be wrong about this...) > When the sales hurt enough and they have not choice, I will reconsider. No, hopefully THEY will reconsider. You couldn't get Linus to accept non-gpl code either. > Breathe, because you die before I change my position, if you are hold a > breath. > > I do not trust Promise, and three years of their general arrogance is more > than enough. I honestly doubt that the suit who just wandered through has a clue what the GPL is. He's not a lawyer, and he doesn't write free software. If he really was trying to help, and he was new to this, woudn't it be a nice first impression to clearly say "this licensing issue is blocking the inclusion of your code" so he knows what the problem is rather than "we're biased against promise, so we're going to pick on you and call you names?" > Mind you that at one point I had two people in the San Jose > office that were friendly be they are now gone. If you've approached every new person from promise this way ever since, I'm not exactly suprised you haven't met more like them. (I honestly hope that the previous sentence was a harsh and unfair assessment, and that you haven't been doing that.) No corporation is truly a monolithic entity. It's just a bunch of disjointed individuals who spend a lot of time in meetings filling out forms. You can deal with them as a faceless professional with a known set of duties, or you can try to deal with them as a human being. (Either way has been known to work, a bit like having two interfaces for the same object in Java. I learned that working at IBM. Plus the concepts of plausible deniability, least expected effort, a sort of judo approach to political infighting, that forgiveness is an order of magnitude easier to get than permission because punishing you takes effort, turning uncertainty to your advantage through the power of procrastination, and that everything I've seen so far in dilbert is less than 5% off from reality in the Fortune 500. Then I got the heck out of there and joined a six person start-up.) > Regards, > > Andre Hedrick > Linux ATA Development Rob Random geek without standing in this issue, who readily admits it but comments anyway. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [craigl@promise.com: Getting A Patch Into The Kernel] (fwd) 2001-06-13 10:51 ` Rob Landley @ 2001-06-13 17:57 ` Andre Hedrick 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Andre Hedrick @ 2001-06-13 17:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rob Landley; +Cc: bert hubert, Craig Lyons, linux-kernel On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Rob Landley wrote: > Well, you're maintainer and I'm obviously not, but it's nice to hear you've > kept an open mind on this issue. :) I have seen one version and I got physically sick. > > All I want is the API rules to the signatures and we have them now. > > > > We do not need their driver. > > Reinventing the wheel can be fun. Richard Stallman's been doing that for Assuming that the first thing presented was a round one and not the flat-sided square that is being misrepresented. > > Stating/Implying that Linux Maintainers do not care about "quality". > > "Quality" is a loaded word in marketing circles, due to ISO nine zillion and We all know this, and it was their intent to slap around the idea that we lack quality. > You are aware that you were speaking to a marketing person from Promise, > correct? (He admitted it and everything. We didn't even have to use > thumbscrews. Kind of a waste to get them all out and oiled and everything in > that case...) No, because marketing people have at least three faces. > > Oh it gets much worse, but I want to see if the sales for Promise have hit > > hard enough to break their linux-unfriendly additude. > > The dude came hat in hand into the linux-kernel mailing list asking how he > could play nice with us, (apparently honestly not knowing,) and you bit his > head off. Like I said, he is a lamb in a slaughter house that Promise created. It was just this year (late-April) that Promise came "HAT and Hand" and "Knife in the Other" and I got suckered again. > I don't think sales have hit hard enough to overcome THAT just yet. But I > could be wrong... 36 Apr 10 James Baker - PTE (9,744) RE: lack of Linux support hurt sales 37 Apr 11 support@promise.co (1,243) Re: RE: lack of Linux support hurt sales 38 Apr 11 Daron Keith (10,549) RE: lack of Linux support hurt sales 39 Apr 11 support@promise.co (1,243) Re: RE: lack of Linux support hurt sales 40 Apr 11 James Baker - PTE (11,069) RE: lack of Linux support hurt sales 41 Apr 11 Daron Keith (33,973) RE: lack of Linux support hurt sales #41 was a VIRUS sent to me to Damage and or Destroy my work. 42 Apr 11 James Baker - PTE (2,944) RE: lack of Linux support hurt sales 43 Apr 11 support@promise.co (1,243) Re: RE: lack of Linux support hurt sales 44 Apr 11 support@promise.co (1,249) Re: RE: lack of Linux support hurt sales 45 Apr 11 Billy Harrison (4,691) RE: lack of Linux support hurt sales 46 Apr 11 support@promise.co (1,249) Re: RE: lack of Linux support hurt sales 47 Apr 11 Daron Keith (6,967) RE: lack of Linux support hurt sales 48 Apr 11 Billy Harrison (7,323) RE: lack of Linux support hurt sales 49 Apr 11 support@promise.co (1,249) Re: RE: lack of Linux support hurt sales 50 Apr 11 Billy Harrison (10,213) RE: lack of Linux support hurt sales 51 Apr 12 James Baker - PTE (2,339) RE: lack of Linux support hurt sales 52 Apr 12 James Baker - PTE (1,524) Update <subject change> > > Mind you the came begging for help because their sales are off, and I was > > willing to help on the terms of GPL/GNU and mine. But GPL/GNU was to big > > to choke down. > > Okay, THERE is the problem. Halfway through the message. Why not start with > that next time? Because I am a lamer in email and prefere face to face. > If the problem is that the code will not be made available under the GPL, > then of course that IS an insurmountable problem for getting it included in > the kernel. But it's entirely possible that our marketing friend didn't know > that. It's entirely possible he doesn't know what the GPL -IS-. (If you've > been sharing a private conversation with him that hasn't been CC'd to the > list, than obviously I could be wrong about this...) I am sorry to chuckle but people have lost their jobs at Promise over working with me to bring that company closer to GPL. The guys that this has happened to I offered to help them out but they managed on their own. > > When the sales hurt enough and they have not choice, I will reconsider. > > No, hopefully THEY will reconsider. You couldn't get Linus to accept non-gpl > code either. No, I will reconsider, since we are assuming that they are coming back with two hats, one in each hand. This one hat one hand thing hurts. > > Breathe, because you die before I change my position, if you are hold a > > breath. > > > > I do not trust Promise, and three years of their general arrogance is more > > than enough. > > I honestly doubt that the suit who just wandered through has a clue what the They do not wear "suits", thanks for the laugh! > GPL is. He's not a lawyer, and he doesn't write free software. If he really > was trying to help, and he was new to this, woudn't it be a nice first > impression to clearly say "this licensing issue is blocking the inclusion of > your code" so he knows what the problem is rather than "we're biased against > promise, so we're going to pick on you and call you names?" > > > Mind you that at one point I had two people in the San Jose > > office that were friendly be they are now gone. > > If you've approached every new person from promise this way ever since, I'm > not exactly suprised you haven't met more like them. (I honestly hope that > the previous sentence was a harsh and unfair assessment, and that you haven't > been doing that.) It is unfair, because I got screwed by Promise just this past April. It was the last time and I told them that fact. > No corporation is truly a monolithic entity. It's just a bunch of disjointed > individuals who spend a lot of time in meetings filling out forms. You can > deal with them as a faceless professional with a known set of duties, or you > can try to deal with them as a human being. In this case you are wrong and I wish you were not. Lastly, I gave this fellow my mobile cell-number and told him that I do not want his driver, I want honesty and that I am mad and tired of the story-line and "Broken Promise's" that they send and sell. So Craig, my phone has not rung or your story has not changed. Regards, Andre Hedrick Linux ATA Development ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [craigl@promise.com: Getting A Patch Into The Kernel] (fwd) 2001-06-13 6:22 [craigl@promise.com: Getting A Patch Into The Kernel] (fwd) Andre Hedrick 2001-06-13 6:43 ` bert hubert @ 2001-06-13 9:10 ` Arjan van de Ven 1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Arjan van de Ven @ 2001-06-13 9:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: craigl, linux-kernel Dear Mr. Craig Lyons, > Hello, > > My name is Craig Lyons and I am the marketing manager at Promise Technology. > We have a question and are hoping you can point us in the right direction. > In the 2.4 kernel there is support for some of our products (Ultra 66, Ultra > 100, etc.). As you may or may not know, our Ultra family of controllers > (which are just standard IDE controllers and do not have RAID) use the same > ASIC on them as our FastTrak RAID controllers do. The 2.4 kernel will > recognize our Ultra family of controllers, but there is a problem in that a > FastTrak will not be recognized as a FastTrak, but as an Ultra. > Consequently, the array on the FastTrak is not recognized as an array, but > instead each disk is seen individually, and the users data cannot be > properly accessed. This is not correct. Kernel 2.4.5-ac13 and later have a driver to support the Fasttrak raid system. I wish Promise was more helpful during the development of this driver, as it is currently developed fully independent and without any help / support or even acknowledgement of Promise. As a result, not yet all RAID modes and configurations are fully supported. Greetings, Arjan van de Ven ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2001-06-13 17:57 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2001-06-13 6:22 [craigl@promise.com: Getting A Patch Into The Kernel] (fwd) Andre Hedrick 2001-06-13 6:43 ` bert hubert 2001-06-13 7:06 ` Andre Hedrick 2001-06-13 10:51 ` Rob Landley 2001-06-13 17:57 ` Andre Hedrick 2001-06-13 9:10 ` Arjan van de Ven
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).