From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: PING^7 (was Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] Corrections and customization of the SG_IO command whitelist (CVE-2012-4542)) Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 23:12:52 +0200 Message-ID: <519D34D4.1010402@redhat.com> References: <1360163761-8541-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <519C674A.50700@redhat.com> <20130522093249.GC3466@mtj.dyndns.org> <519C959A.3090100@redhat.com> <20130522100212.GE3466@mtj.dyndns.org> <519C9CBC.3050003@redhat.com> <20130522134134.GA15189@mtj.dyndns.org> <519CD234.40608@redhat.com> <20130522150335.GC2777@thunk.org> <519CE9FE.2030007@redhat.com> <20130522203906.GC23845@mtj.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130522203906.GC23845@mtj.dyndns.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: Theodore Ts'o , "James E.J. Bottomley" , Jens Axboe , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Il 22/05/2013 22:39, Tejun Heo ha scritto: > Hey, > > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 05:53:34PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> I do listen to review feedback, but I also expect the other side to >> listen to me, ask me what is not clear, and possess some knowledge of >> the domain that he's reviewing patches for. All of which, quite >> frankly, I have not seen in this case. > > Heh, nice one. As we've talked on RH mailing list, I don't doubt this > has been a pretty bad experience for you but it also has been one of > the worst review experiences for me too. I can imagine. Sorry about that. > I'm not saying you don't listen to reviews at all but the reception > definitely feels very low-gain. Frankly, I can say the same with s/reviews/explanations/... > Anyways, at this point, the easiest way to make forward progress is > completely separating out security fix from the rest along with the > "count me out" knob, which should be able to cover most of the > described use cases anyway. Let's please do further modifications to > the filtering table as a separate step. Okay, we seem to have reverted (both of us) to a more civil tone, and I appreciate setting a way forward. I'll send three separate series in the next few days. I guess it's okay to send the common patch twice. Paolo