From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [net-next-2.6 PATCH v4 3/3] TCPCT part 1c: initial SYN exchange with SYNACK data Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 21:14:29 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <20091102.211429.127727810.davem@davemloft.net> References: <4AEF207C.9030002@gmail.com> <1257185798.28925.33.camel@Joe-Laptop.home> <4AEF3DD5.5050408@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: joe@perches.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi, eric.dumazet@gmail.com To: william.allen.simpson@gmail.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:47981 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750724AbZKCFOF (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2009 00:14:05 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4AEF3DD5.5050408@gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: William Allen Simpson Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:15:17 -0500 > If somebody else submitted a patch to change all the rest, I'd be > content to follow along. That's not how things work. You cannot put a requirement that the rules are followed everywhere perfectly in existing code before you're willing to follow them. Nothing is special about you or your work. You're being very unreasonable on several fronts especially with your seeming unwillingness to follow our procedures, coding style, and rules. Actually, you seem to be willing to follow it, sometimes, when it suits and doesn't inconvenience you. And this behavior is starting to rub people the wrong way. People less and less want to review your work, and I want to make sure you are shown exactly why that is happening.