Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753797AbYJ1UKy (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2008 16:10:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752652AbYJ1UKq (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2008 16:10:46 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com ([209.85.198.238]:14226 "EHLO rv-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751897AbYJ1UKp (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2008 16:10:45 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references:x-google-sender-auth; b=byCvHMzyvy9jUiPMbh2OeNtzzVLtyeT6NYomgIX8Bh5A+rLyHzwsTPlYkr1fVMhWjP KjhQBLwD9yVVl5Pcm8eiAALxjfLN/c9chq6F9Ova7+XjWUS7Mqa1sFqhM++peJmeJzbz RGxvy4iNGXVu6m8D/ByaekzzrBblTE/Qzv3ok= Message-ID: <517f3f820810281310y2b02705fs8b402a5ca5117f51@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:10:44 -0500 From: "Michael Kerrisk" To: "Ulrich Drepper" Subject: Re: [PATCH] cleanup paccept Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org In-Reply-To: <200810281909.m9SJ9pdj003624@hs20-bc2-1.build.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200810281909.m9SJ9pdj003624@hs20-bc2-1.build.redhat.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 5f267477bdd41d15 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2928 Lines: 71 On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 2:09 PM, Ulrich Drepper wrote: > This patch doesn't change *any* functionality from what is currently > in the upstream kernel. There is no reason to start arguing again and > for me to explain everything the way I did it months ago. This is just > a *cleanup patch*, nothing else. If you want to know why this cleanup > is needed read the discussions of > > commit 2d4c8266774188cda7f7e612e6dfb8ad12c579d5 > Author: Michael Kerrisk > Date: Mon Sep 22 13:57:49 2008 -0700 > > sys_paccept: disable paccept() until API design is resolved > > > For example, here: > > http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-netdev/2008/9/16/3310534 > > > I don't agree with the change but I'm also tired arguing. So just > clean up the mess created by change initiated by the posting mentioned > above. Oh, please! The "mess" arose because you refused to explain things in a simple and coherent fashion, even when politely asked. And now you compound the mess by running up two threads in the last 24 hours with versions of the patch (are they the same -- who knows? You give us no clue.) So I'll repeat here, what I said in the other: 1. Please take the trouble to CC interested parties. For example, the people CCed in recent threads that discussed earlier versions of the the patch. This is basic LKML basic etiquette, since almost no one reads all LKML, nor reads it hourly. Doing this allows interested parties to comment on the patch, and also avoids patches hitting the kernel "under the radar". 2. Don't assume anyone has cached earlier discussions of the topic. Write a clear, complete description of the patch that could be read by someone new to the topic, something like a summary of http://lwn.net/Articles/281965/ and http://udrepper.livejournal.com/20407.html [If you had done this the first time round, then there'd be very little work other than cut and paste this time round.] 3. Explain what changes have been made from earlier versions of the patch, and why. E.g., some discussion that summarizes this: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/106071 4. CC linux-api@vger.kernel.org on patches that are API changes. This requirement was added to SubmitChecklist in the last few weeks. 5. CC me or linux-man@vger.kernel.org, so that something makes its way into man-pages. > The actual patch which is in the kernel is different from > the patch in the mail: only the signal mask handling has been disabled. > This is why this is only a cleanup patch. And that does not explain to the world at large what this to-be-enabled system call does, or why it's needed. Cheers, Michael -- 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/