From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the aio tree with the vfs tree
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 05:35:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160315053533.GH17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160314152438.GG17923@kvack.org>
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:24:38AM -0400, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 08:35:23AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > The aio changes have either been reviewed negatively or not at all. That
> > tree should be dropped.
>
> That isn't solely your decision. If you have comments, please provide
> constructive feedback, as there are users and use-cases that need this
> kind of functionality.
"This kind of functionality" being what, exactly? Bypassing code review?
It's not that you've made trivial mistakes; everyone does from time to time.
But failing to post patches with non-trivial interactions outside of the
subsystem you are familiar with (be it on fsdevel or privately to people who
work with the areas involved) *AND* failing to recognize that the lack
of review might be a problem even after having been explicitly told so...
For fuck sake, you should know better. You are not a newbie with a pet set
of half-baked patches for his pet application, refering to (unspecified)
"users that need this kind of functionality" and getting very surprised when
those mean, rude folks on development lists inform them that code review is
more than just a good idea.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-15 5:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-14 4:32 linux-next: manual merge of the aio tree with the vfs tree Stephen Rothwell
2016-03-14 4:36 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-03-14 4:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-03-14 7:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-03-14 15:24 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-03-15 5:35 ` Al Viro [this message]
2016-03-15 13:24 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2016-03-15 8:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-03-15 4:06 Stephen Rothwell
2016-03-15 4:34 ` Al Viro
2016-03-15 4:53 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-03-15 5:07 ` Al Viro
2016-03-15 5:19 ` Al Viro
2016-03-15 13:12 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2017-09-11 1:29 Stephen Rothwell
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=20160315053533.GH17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=bcrl@kvack.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/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 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).