Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Message-ID: <1544536167.5269.7.camel@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "firmware: dmi_scan: Use lowercase letters for
 UUID"
From:   Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.com>
To:     Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date:   Tue, 11 Dec 2018 14:49:27 +0100
In-Reply-To: <87efaotgi1.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk>
References: <20181205211351.5309-1-peter@korsgaard.com>
         <1544086444.5492.1.camel@suse.com> <87a7ljyppx.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk>
         <1544092087.5492.3.camel@suse.com> <878t1264lf.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk>
         <87efaotgi1.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk>
Organization: Suse Linux
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 2018-12-11 at 13:06 +0100, Peter Korsgaard wrote:
> > > > > > "Peter" == Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com> writes:
> 
> Hi Jean,
> 
>  >> Look, you can imagine that I was perfectly aware of what I was doing
>  >> when I made that change, and that I pondered the decision carefully at
>  >> that time. And my decision was that the change should be made. As far
>  >> as I'm concerned, this ship has sailed already, sorry.
> 
>  > Sorry, what is the perceived risk of reverting this change? Just the
>  > minor inconsistency between the dmidecode and sysfs output? As stated
>  > above, the RFC requires conforming parsers to handle upper case as well.
> 
> I would appreciate if you could explain what risk you see from reverting
> this change?

The exact same risk that you are complaining about, for a different
pair of kernel versions. You cannot at the same time argue that the
change should not have been done back then, and ask for same change to
be done again now.

-- 
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support