From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: patch sysfs-implement-sysfs-tagged-directory-support.patch added to gregkh-2.6 tree Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 22:24:55 -0700 Message-ID: References: <12725729473590@kroah.org> <4BDA5A2D.6080904@kernel.org> <20100430044522.GA29845@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Tejun Heo , bcrl@lhnet.ca, benjamin.thery@bull.net, cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, kay.sievers@vrfy.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, serue@us.ibm.com To: Greg KH Return-path: Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]:38989 "EHLO out02.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932964Ab0D3RRB (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Apr 2010 13:17:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20100430044522.GA29845@suse.de> (Greg KH's message of "Thu\, 29 Apr 2010 21\:45\:22 -0700") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Greg KH writes: > On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 06:18:53AM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote: >> On 04/29/2010 10:29 PM, gregkh@suse.de wrote: >> > >> > This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled >> > >> > Subject: sysfs: Implement sysfs tagged directory support. >> > >> > to my gregkh-2.6 tree. Its filename is >> > >> > sysfs-implement-sysfs-tagged-directory-support.patch >> > >> > This tree can be found at >> > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/gregkh-2.6/patches/ >> >> I wish at least more comments are added before it goes mainline. I >> don't really understand the current form. > > Ok, that's fine with me, I'll pull it back out. ????? Tejun you have offered nothing constructive to the review, except looking and saying you don't understand what is going on. I have a tree posted with all of my code. I have given snippets of the pieces yet to be merged, and still your reaction is you don't understand please break it down for you in itty-bitty little pieces, that you don't need to think about it, to understand it. Tejun I think for the code to make any sense to you I would need to rip out out and/or rewrite the kobject layer, and possible the device model code as well. Tejun I'm sorry you can't understand the code, and I'm sorry the code may be over-general. In part that is because making the code over-general is what you asked for when reviewing it the first time. Greg I have not gotten any constructive feedback. Not a specific please fix/or comment a specific thing. Not a comment that says something is a bug and just wrong. The closest I have gotten is a request to make the code even more complicated and intrusive, and harder to keep correct by adding an ns member to kobjects which comes to 3 copies of the same state for the same objects which ultimately is more difficult to keep in sync. I am more than happy to improve the code, but at this point I really think the code needs to be merged so people are forced to deal with it, instead of saying "I don't understand the code" in the review and blocking the merge. I don't think the code will improve any more by being out of tree. Eric