Message-ID: <520208D1.3090102@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2013 16:44:01 +0800
From: Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com>
CC: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, <xi.wang@gmail.com>,
        <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/sysctl_binary.c: improve the usage of return value
 'result'
References: <5200A5E6.9020803@asianux.com> <8761vibihw.fsf@xmission.com> <5201D62B.6080905@asianux.com> <5201E192.7060108@huawei.com> <5201E805.2080008@asianux.com> <5201F10B.7040102@huawei.com> <5201FF45.8000906@asianux.com>
In-Reply-To: <5201FF45.8000906@asianux.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2082
Lines: 61

>> The first one is, if you get a reply from a maintainer (especially a top
>> maintainer), try harder to understand/learn from that reply, but don't
>> keep asking why and don't keep arguing without much thinking. I think
>> what's why sometimes people are annoyed in the discussion with you.
>>
> 
> In my opinion, "understand/learn" means:
> 
>   learn the proof which the author supplied;
>   understand the author's opinion;
>   know about what the author wants to do now (especially why he intents to send/reply mail to you).
> 
> But "understand/learn" does not mean:
> 
>   familiar about the 'professional' details.
>   if each related member knows about the 'professional' details, it only need a work flow, not need discussing.
> 
> Do you think so too ?
> 
> 
> Hmm... for each reply, I think it has 3 requirements:
> 
>   1. match the original contents which we want to reply.
>   2. say opinion clearly.
>   3. provide proof.
> 
> I guess your suggestion is for 1st: if we can not understand/learn from
> the original contents, of cause, our reply can not match it.
> 
> Since discussing is thinking process, and we may get more understanding
> during thinking, so it permits to continue reply multiple times (if for
> each reply is qualified with the 3 requirements above).
> 
> 
> Have you ever seen some of my reply which misunderstand(or not learn
> enough) from original contents ?
> 
> Maybe you often saw that I continue reply multiple times for a thread,
> but I think, each reply matches the 3 requirements above.
> 

You fail to see there's a problem in you and how you frustrate people and
waste their time...

For example in this thread:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/4/405

and this therad:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/6/20/228

Please don't argue anymore...

Back to coding and won't reply to this thread...

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/