Alex, On Sun, 11 Dec 2022 11:40:39 +0000, Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > A simple "hey, you're wrong here, the PMU extensions do not follow the > principles of the ID scheme for fields in ID registers" would have > sufficed. This is what I did, and saved you the hassle of looking it up. > Guess you never made a silly mistake ever, right? It's not so much about making a silly mistake. I do that all the time. But it is about the way you state these things, and the weight that your reviews carry. You're a trusted reviewer, with a lot of experience, and posting with an @arm.com address: what you say in a public forum sticks. When you assert that the author is wrong, they will take it at face value. > Otherwise, good job encouraging people to help review KVM/arm64 patches ;) What is the worse: no review? or a review that spreads confusion? Think about it. I'm all for being nice, but I will call bullshit when I see it asserted by people with a certain level of authority. And I've long made up my mind about the state of the KVM/arm64 review process -- reviews rarely come from people who have volunteered to do so, but instead from those who have either a vested interest in it, or an ulterior motive. Hey ho... M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible. _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
