Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 1/3] arm: pmu: Fix overflow checks for PMUv3p5 long counters

[Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>]

Alex,

On Sun, 11 Dec 2022 11:40:39 +0000,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com> wrote:
> 
> A simple "hey, you're wrong here, the PMU extensions do not follow the
> principles of the ID scheme for fields in ID registers" would have
> sufficed.

This is what I did, and saved you the hassle of looking it up.

> Guess you never made a silly mistake ever, right?

It's not so much about making a silly mistake. I do that all the time.
But it is about the way you state these things, and the weight that
your reviews carry. You're a trusted reviewer, with a lot of
experience, and posting with an @arm.com address: what you say in a
public forum sticks. When you assert that the author is wrong, they
will take it at face value.

> Otherwise, good job encouraging people to help review KVM/arm64 patches ;)

What is the worse: no review? or a review that spreads confusion?
Think about it. I'm all for being nice, but I will call bullshit when
I see it asserted by people with a certain level of authority.

And I've long made up my mind about the state of the KVM/arm64 review
process -- reviews rarely come from people who have volunteered to do
so, but instead from those who have either a vested interest in it, or
an ulterior motive. Hey ho...

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.