From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH] tipc: fix endianness on tipc subscriber messages Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:38:11 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <20100308.153811.109635961.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20100308200315.GE23634@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <29C1DC0826876849BDD9F1C67ABA29430728D116@ala-mail09.corp.ad.wrs.com> <20100308.125429.14323494.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: nhorman@tuxdriver.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: allan.stephens@windriver.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:51765 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755893Ab0CHXhw (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Mar 2010 18:37:52 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20100308.125429.14323494.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Allan, I don't think you're being reasonable at all. You tell Neil he's breaking things, and that his code isn't following the current spec. Neil asks where the spec is. And you tell him your out-of-tree code is the spec. That's absolutely rediculious. It is totally unreasonable to require Neil to unravel the mess that is the out-of-tree TIPC implementation in order to figure out what the current protocol "spec" is. You're doing a lot of "oh crap, don't do this, you'll break this or that." But frankly, you really don't care what's in the upstream kernel. If you did, your stuff wouldn't be out of tree. Therefore I take every piece of feedback you give to Neil's patches with a grain of salt, at best.