Re: [PATCH 2/3] drm/scheduler: Fix UAF in drm_sched_fence_get_timeline_name

[Pekka Paalanen]

On Mon, 17 Jul 2023 17:55:04 +0200
Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> Am 15.07.23 um 16:14 schrieb alyssa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:

...

> > Lina has been polite and accommodating while AMD calls her code
> > "outright nonsense" and gets "outright NAK"s, and puts her into an
> > impossible catch-22 where no matter what she does it's NAK'd.  
> 
> Well as far as I can see I'm totally polite as well.

Christian,

politeness is in the eye of the beholder. You do not get to decide how
other people feel.

I consider myself a very blunt and difficult reviewer on my own area
(which I consider mostly as a negative trait), and while I have
alienated some people over the years, I try hard to not intentionally
hurt anyone. Sometimes it means that writing one email takes an hour or
two. It can take a tremendous amount of energy. Like this email here.

If people have the courage to repeatedly tell someone that the someone
comes out as off-putting, it cannot be dismissed. It really means
coming out as off-putting. There does not need to be anything malicious
related to it from either side, it could as well be a cultural
difference that one cannot know in advance, or it could be a personal
hurt inside the offending person lashing out.

When told, it is time to reflect.

> Pointing out that approaches doesn't seem to make sense and NAKing 
> patches is a perfectly normal part of the review process.

Yes. You don't have to change your message.

One only needs to make an effort to try to change their tone. Otherwise
they lose and alienate developers by choosing to hurt them. It was an
accident before one knew about it, but now it is known, so how one
communicates is a decision. It's no longer an accident.

> What you need to to is to take a step back and ask yourself why this 
> here is facing so much rejection from our side. I have to admit that I 
> don't seem to be good at explaining that, cause we are obviously talking 
> past each other, but you don't seem to try hard to understand what I'm 
> pointing out either.

Maybe try using a softer tone for a start? Lina has reiterated the
restrictions imposed by the hardware, the firmware they cannot change,
and Rust design principles. How do *you* fit those with unchanged
drm/sched?

> > That's not ok.  
> 
> As far as I can see it is.

Hurting people is not ok.

Not even if the kernel community culture traditionally does so.

> As maintainer of a commonly used component my first duty is to preserve 
> the status quo and prevent modifications which are not well thought 
> through.

Of course.

Accidentally hurting someone is eventually unavoidable. Defending the
communication style that hurt someone in order to keep on doing that
just makes one look like a d...


Thanks,
pq

Attachment: pgpd5aDKx_xjO.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature