From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, 3.7-rc7, RESEND] fs: revert commit bbdd6808 to fallocate UAPI
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 02:08:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121207010837.GA16373@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201212061037.56597.Martin@lichtvoll.de>
* Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de> wrote:
> > The thing that people are complaining about is exactly the
> > reverse of this. It's *protecting* us from making mistakes,
> > and doesn't actually add any new interfaces in itself.
> >
> > This is why I'm so annoyed with this stupid thread. It's
> > been going on forever, and reverting that change WOULD BE
> > OBJECTIVELY A BAD IDEA.
>
> See, thats where you have a problem with "reality".
>
> It seems you cannot accept the fact that some developers
> disliked the process in which this change was pushed. [...]
I don't think you have understood Linus's argument above.
The "process" does not change the object technical merits of a
patch. Ever. This patch is _good_, and objectively good. No
amount of 'bad process' can make this patch bad.
Now, hypothetically, if this was an objectively bad patch, then
any "bad process" used to push it would add insult to injury and
it could be reason enough to flame Tytso twice as hard.
But it turns out the patch was right and good, so kudos to Tytso
for cutting through the bike shed painting and politicks of
fsdevel - which "process" would have deprived us of a good
patch...
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-07 1:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 69+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-11-19 23:04 [PATCH] fs: revert commit bbdd6808 to fallocate UAPI Dave Chinner
2012-11-20 16:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-11-26 0:28 ` [PATCH, 3.7-rc7, RESEND] " Dave Chinner
2012-11-26 2:55 ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-11-26 6:14 ` Tao Ma
2012-11-26 9:12 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-05 10:48 ` Martin Steigerwald
2012-12-05 15:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-12-05 16:18 ` Martin Steigerwald
2012-12-05 16:33 ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-12-05 17:24 ` Martin Steigerwald
2012-12-05 17:34 ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-12-05 17:55 ` Martin Steigerwald
2012-12-06 0:42 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-06 9:24 ` Martin Steigerwald
2012-12-05 18:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-12-06 1:14 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-06 3:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-12-06 9:37 ` Martin Steigerwald
2012-12-07 1:08 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2012-12-07 2:40 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-07 10:24 ` Martin Steigerwald
2012-12-06 12:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-12-06 16:50 ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-12-07 1:57 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-06 12:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-12-07 1:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2012-12-07 3:19 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-07 17:36 ` Ric Wheeler
2012-12-07 18:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-12-07 19:03 ` Chris Mason
2012-12-07 20:43 ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-12-07 21:09 ` Chris Mason
2012-12-07 21:27 ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-12-07 21:43 ` Chris Mason
2012-12-07 21:49 ` Ric Wheeler
2012-12-07 21:57 ` Chris Mason
2012-12-07 22:51 ` Eric Sandeen
2012-12-07 22:52 ` Eric Sandeen
2012-12-07 21:42 ` Ric Wheeler
2012-12-07 21:57 ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-12-07 22:02 ` Ric Wheeler
2012-12-08 0:39 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-08 2:52 ` Joel Becker
2012-12-08 4:04 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-08 0:17 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-08 1:39 ` Chris Mason
2012-12-10 16:02 ` Chris Mason
2012-12-10 17:37 ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-12-10 18:05 ` Steven Whitehouse
2012-12-10 18:13 ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-12-10 18:20 ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-12-11 12:16 ` Steven Whitehouse
2012-12-11 22:09 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-10 18:52 ` Ric Wheeler
2012-12-11 0:52 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-07 19:30 ` Steven Rostedt
2012-12-07 21:14 ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-12-07 21:47 ` Ric Wheeler
2012-12-07 23:25 ` Howard Chu
2012-12-08 0:50 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-08 13:52 ` Howard Chu
2012-12-08 14:02 ` Ric Wheeler
2012-12-07 22:01 ` Eric Sandeen
2012-12-09 21:37 ` Ric Wheeler
2012-11-26 11:53 ` Alan Cox
2012-11-26 14:43 ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-11-26 21:12 ` Dave Chinner
2012-11-27 13:44 ` Martin Steigerwald
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=20121207010837.GA16373@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=Martin@lichtvoll.de \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--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).