On Wed, May 03, 2023 at 08:33:48AM -0400, James Bottomley wrote: > On Wed, 2023-05-03 at 05:57 -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote: > > On Wed, May 03, 2023 at 11:50:51AM +0200, Petr Tesařík wrote: > > > If anyone ever wants to use this code tagging framework for > > > something > > > else, they will also have to convert relevant functions to macros, > > > slowly changing the kernel to a minefield where local identifiers, > > > struct, union and enum tags, field names and labels must avoid name > > > conflict with a tagged function. For now, I have to remember that > > > alloc_pages is forbidden, but the list may grow. > > > > Also, since you're not actually a kernel contributor yet... > > You have an amazing talent for being wrong. But even if you were > actually right about this, it would be an ad hominem personal attack on > a new contributor which crosses the line into unacceptable behaviour on > the list and runs counter to our code of conduct. ...Err, what? That was intended _in no way_ as a personal attack. If I was mistaken I do apologize, but lately I've run across quite a lot of people offering review feedback to patches I post that turn out to have 0 or 10 patches in the kernel, and - to be blunt - a pattern of offering feedback in strong language with a presumption of experience that takes a lot to respond to adequately on a technical basis. I don't think a suggestion to spend a bit more time reading code instead of speculating is out of order! We could all, put more effort into how we offer review feedback.
