<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 2014-12-09 um 07:50 schrieb Avinash
Patil:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJwzM1kaM-uAM8-hbLyqRXn+ycLv7+JqxD_1avKbaZPS4=XaVg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Hi Nick,<br>
<br>
I saw one of your patch to brcmfmac in Lunux wireless. For one
such FIXME you have added mutex lock; just because comment
said need to have mutex lock here.<br>
<br>
You did not have any hardware to test this patch; you simply
created patch because comment said so. Rafal and other
maintainers were wondering- "Really! Is this fixme that
simple? How come we did not get it?" and then it was
discovered that function which is calling this one already was
having mutex lock and here you cannot acquire it again..<br>
</div>
<div>Rafal finally did not take that fix for obvious reason.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Patches should be submitted to just to create your
portfolio but they should actually solve some existing design
problem.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Do I need to say more about your ban?<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Avinash<br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 9:26 PM, Nick
Krause <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:xerofoify@gmail.com" target="_blank">xerofoify@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5">On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 10:32 AM, <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu">Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu</a>>
wrote:<br>
> On Sun, 07 Dec 2014 22:15:13 -0500, nick said:<br>
>> Greetings Fellow Developers,<br>
>> I have finally learned my lesson as you can
tell from my newest patches being<br>
>> accepted or considered in good form.<br>
><br>
> Right now,all I'm seeing in linux-next from you is
2 patches that<br>
> remove FIXME comments. Given your previous history
of submitting<br>
> patches that failed to accurately analyze C program
flow, And the<br>
> commit message on one of them:<br>
><br>
> Remove FIXME comments about needing fault
addresses to be returned. These<br>
> are propaagated from walk_addr_generic to
gva_to_gpa and from there to<br>
> ops->read_std and ops->write_std.<br>
><br>
> doesn't actually address the question of how to
deal with fault addresses.<br>
> Yes, they're propagated back - but it doesn't
directly address the question<br>
> of how a fault address is handled (in other words,
you failed to show that<br>
> write_std actually does the right thing once it
gets whatever we send back)<br>
><br>
> I wouldn't hold my breath....<br>
</div>
</div>
I submitted the patch. The maintainer changed the commit
message not me.<br>
<div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5">Nick<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Kernelnewbies mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org">Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies"
target="_blank">http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org">Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies">http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
Not that I have any say in this, but I feel like a ban should rather
be justified by someone's behavior instead of incorrect patches. I
guess most of us have send awful patches at some point, the question
though is how we dealt with it. I'm not saying the ban should be
lifted, I'm just saying we should communicate the right arguments
for his ban (instead of blaming him for commit messages he didn't
even write).<br>
<br>
br,<br>
phil<br>
</body>
</html>