From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next 09/10] IB/mlx4: Add timestamp_mask and hca_core_clock to query_device Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 12:48:56 -0600 Message-ID: <20150527184856.GA16059@obsidianresearch.com> References: <1432134677.5304.23.camel@opteya.com> <20150526160624.GA11800@obsidianresearch.com> <20150526185315.GF11800@obsidianresearch.com> <20150526220724.GC4502@obsidianresearch.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Or Gerlitz Cc: Doug Ledford , "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Amir Vadai , Tal Alon , Matan Barak , Yann Droneaud List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 02:54:12PM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 1:07 AM, Jason Gunthorpe > wrote: > > On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:39:04PM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote: > >> >> Jason, you (U2 BTW) play really, really hard - refusing to say **one** > >> >> word on your approach towards the built-in udata mechanism for uverbs > >> >> which I asked you to comment on. > >> > >> > And I asked to see the user space side and you have angrily refused > >> > every time. > >> > >> AFAIR I never ever refused to show any piece of code which went under > >> my hands towards Linux to any-one. > > > For future reference, when someone asks a question and you go off on > > an tangental rant and ignore the question, then that process repeats, > > still without answering the question - most english speakers would > > call that refusing to answer the question. It is not looked upon kindly. > > Jason, > > It's not that you asked to see the code ala "hey, do you happen to > have a git with the user space code for people to inspect while > doing the review on the kernel part", but rather U2 saying in a > definitive manner that posting the user space code should be imposed > as pre-requirement to acceptance of the kernel parts. I really didn't Or: First ask: 'We can't really look at the uapi changes here without also seeing the verbs side changes.' (I know others on the list feel the same, so I use 'we') Second ask: 'Lets see the verbs side and I'll let you know.' (.. to your questions based on my review comments ..) Third ask: 'I think we need to have the same policy.' (.. To Yann's point that other kernel communities have a mandatory UAPI policy) Fourth (exasperated) ask: 'Was it not clear? Yann and I asked to see the user space side before reviewing this series further.' I know you are ESL, and I cut you alot of slack, but *come on* - that is incredibly soft language, and certainly not bossing and imposing in a definitive manner a blanket requirement on all patches. Advice: You would be well served to spend a bit more time on your emails. I have no idea what 'but rather U2 saying' means, for instance. Sometimes I just guess at what you are trying to say :| That is the price we pay for an inclusive international community, but everyone needs to be careful before starting a flame war based on percived slight in the text and phrasing of a message. email is hard. Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html