From: David Newall <davidn@davidnewall.com>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortel.com>,
Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add CONFIG_VFAT_NO_CREATE_WITH_LONGNAMES option
Date: Tue, 05 May 2009 20:39:05 +0930 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A001E51.4070903@davidnewall.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090504230357.GI6766@mit.edu>
Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 09:30:20AM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
>> When all of the pieces are public how can having secret veiled reasons
>> make sense?
>>
>
> Legal reasoning and strategy often needs to be kept confidential.
But those needs must defer to the open and public nature of the kernel.
When you propose a change without saying why you giving the clear and
strong impression that something secret is going down and we should just
trust you. That puts everyone in an awkward position because there's
now a risk that can't be properly evaluated.
Whether your patch goes in; whether it doesn't; it now seems there's
something fishy about long filenames, and to be safe, perhaps it would
be better to just turn off anything to do with FAT filesystems. Who
would care, right? Unless i turns out that Linux no longer has the
essential features.
Unless disrupting Linux was the point, and of course it isn't, it seems
that full disclosure is required. And that's before any patch should
even be looked at.
> Note: We don't always ask people for the reason behind why they want,
> say, cgroups to control I/O throttling for example. They may have a
> secret business case for how they will be able to leverage that
> technology with some application stack to make tons and tons of money
> --- and we don't require that deep motives be revealed in those cases.
>
One might not give the deep reason, but if no sufficient reason is
given then there's no sufficient reason and the answer is no. We don't
want features just for the sake of another knob to twiddle. It has to
be a *useful* knob.
> Or possibly it's because it is believed that [a patent] could be
> invalidated,
> which is why OIN is requesting prior art even though the last time to
> invalidate the patent through prior art was denied by the patent
> office.
Whether or not it's disclosed, you have to believe that any change
related to a patent issue will be noticed by people interested in that
issue. You can make a disclosure without making an admission or claim.
And then everybody understands what's going on.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-05 11:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 90+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-01 20:18 [PATCH] Add CONFIG_VFAT_NO_CREATE_WITH_LONGNAMES option Steve French
2009-05-01 21:01 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-05-02 1:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-02 1:59 ` Matthew Wilcox
2009-05-02 3:02 ` Steve French
2009-05-02 4:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-02 9:15 ` tridge
2009-05-02 9:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-05-02 9:30 ` tridge
2009-05-02 12:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-05-03 21:57 ` Pavel Machek
2009-05-03 22:25 ` tridge
2009-05-03 22:56 ` Al Viro
2009-05-03 23:15 ` tridge
2009-05-04 5:42 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-05-04 6:34 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-04 6:49 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-05-04 12:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-04 12:44 ` Matthew Wilcox
2009-05-04 13:06 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-04 13:21 ` Matthew Wilcox
2009-05-04 14:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-04 15:08 ` Matthew Wilcox
2009-05-04 15:36 ` Dave Kleikamp
2009-05-04 15:59 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-05-04 16:07 ` Dave Kleikamp
2009-05-04 16:30 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-05-04 16:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-04 17:18 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-05-04 17:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-04 17:54 ` Matthew Wilcox
2009-05-04 18:14 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-04 18:17 ` Al Viro
2009-05-04 20:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-04 17:06 ` Olivier Galibert
2009-05-04 17:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-05-04 20:53 ` Chris Friesen
2009-05-04 23:03 ` Theodore Tso
2009-05-05 11:09 ` David Newall [this message]
2009-05-05 20:56 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2009-05-05 21:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-05-05 22:29 ` Steve French
2009-05-05 8:31 ` Zero-day exploit details (Was: Add CONFIG_VFAT_NO_CREATE_WITH_LONGNAMES option) David Newall
2009-05-04 16:11 ` [PATCH] Add CONFIG_VFAT_NO_CREATE_WITH_LONGNAMES option Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-04 15:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-04 15:55 ` Matthew Wilcox
2009-05-04 16:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-04 16:22 ` Matthew Wilcox
2009-05-04 22:12 ` Greg KH
2009-05-05 2:01 ` Matthew Wilcox
2009-05-05 2:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-05 2:18 ` Matthew Wilcox
2009-05-05 3:34 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-05 8:05 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2009-05-05 15:35 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-05 21:00 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2009-05-05 21:56 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-05 3:08 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2009-05-04 15:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-05-04 16:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-04 15:40 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2009-05-02 6:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-05-02 2:12 ` Theodore Tso
2009-05-02 6:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-05-01 17:41 Dave Kleikamp
2009-05-01 17:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-05-01 18:12 ` Dave Kleikamp
2009-05-01 18:19 ` Michael Tokarev
2009-05-01 19:09 ` Dave Kleikamp
2009-05-01 18:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-05-02 10:09 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2009-05-02 10:14 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2009-05-02 10:26 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2009-05-02 10:41 ` tridge
2009-05-02 11:03 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2009-05-02 11:13 ` tridge
2009-05-02 11:29 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2009-05-02 11:41 ` tridge
2009-05-02 11:59 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2009-05-02 12:15 ` tridge
2009-05-02 12:48 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2009-05-02 13:06 ` tridge
2009-05-02 14:01 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2009-05-27 12:05 ` vimal singh
2009-05-27 23:57 ` tridge
2009-06-04 10:26 ` vimal singh
2009-06-04 21:33 ` tridge
2009-05-02 10:20 ` tridge
2009-05-02 10:32 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2009-05-03 21:56 ` Pavel Machek
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=4A001E51.4070903@davidnewall.com \
--to=davidn@davidnewall.com \
--cc=cfriesen@nortel.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=matthew@wil \
--cc=shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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).