4 ms·

Did I miss the mud-slinging and corporate culture bashing from the original rejection? I can get the AMD dev being a bit sour by the whole situation if they per

by aqtrans 10y ago

Did I miss the mud-slinging and corporate culture bashing from the original rejection? I can get the AMD dev being a bit sour by the whole situation if they personally spent time working on this rejected patch, but damn.

jff 10y ago
There were certainly implications that the AMD coders were making technically compromised decisions: > The reason the toplevel maintainer (me) doesn't work for Intel or AMD or any vendors, is that I can say NO when your maintainers can't or won't say it. And telling them to sit in a corner and really THINK about what you've done, young man: > I'd like some serious introspection on your team's part on how you got into this situation and how even if I was feeling like merging this (which I'm not) how you'd actually deal with being part of the Linux kernel and not hiding in nicely framed orgchart silo behind a HAL. I honestly don't think the code is Linux worthy code All pretty mild, really, but I'm not the one who got the email telling me my months of work was not Linux-quality and would not be merged. (I am giggling at the idea of "Linux quality" being held up as an ideal)
- aqtrans 10y ago
  Ahh, thanks for pointing those out. I completely skipped over those portions...I was expecting some Linus-level chewing out that I'd missed given the tone of the response, haha. Certainly pretty mild considering the source, though I understand why the second quote would stir things up a bit, especially making it into an "Us vs Them" situation.
- jlgaddis 10y ago
  > ... but I'm not the one who got the email telling me my months of work ... would not be merged. See, the thing is that they were told previously -- back in February? March? -- that this wasn't gonna happen. Instead of trying to work out a better way forward, AMD effectively ignored that, went back to work, and just now came back and said "here's 90k LOC, please merge". Dave replied -- rightfully, in my opinion -- "no".
Analemma_ 10y ago
While I agree with Dave that the patch should not have been merged, I can understand the tone of the reply, not just from frustration but maybe even some actual panic about job security. Depending on how AMD's management takes this news, some of the people who wrote this patch may not have a job in a little while if the merge doesn't happen. I'm trying to be sympathetic.
- jfim 10y ago
  Considering AMD is bleeding money, I assume it was pretty hard as well to get someone to sign off on getting headcount/resources to write Linux drivers.

by aqtrans 10y ago

jff 10y ago

There were certainly implications that the AMD coders were making technically compromised decisions: > The reason the toplevel maintainer (me) doesn't work for Intel or AMD or any vendors, is that I can say NO when your maintainers can't or won't say it. And telling them to sit in a corner and really THINK about what you've done, young man: > I'd like some serious introspection on your team's part on how you got into this situation and how even if I was feeling like merging this (which I'm not) how you'd actually deal with being part of the Linux kernel and not hiding in nicely framed orgchart silo behind a HAL. I honestly don't think the code is Linux worthy code All pretty mild, really, but I'm not the one who got the email telling me my months of work was not Linux-quality and would not be merged. (I am giggling at the idea of "Linux quality" being held up as an ideal)

aqtrans 10y ago
Ahh, thanks for pointing those out. I completely skipped over those portions...I was expecting some Linus-level chewing out that I'd missed given the tone of the response, haha. Certainly pretty mild considering the source, though I understand why the second quote would stir things up a bit, especially making it into an "Us vs Them" situation.
jlgaddis 10y ago
> ... but I'm not the one who got the email telling me my months of work ... would not be merged. See, the thing is that they were told previously -- back in February? March? -- that this wasn't gonna happen. Instead of trying to work out a better way forward, AMD effectively ignored that, went back to work, and just now came back and said "here's 90k LOC, please merge". Dave replied -- rightfully, in my opinion -- "no".

Analemma_ 10y ago

While I agree with Dave that the patch should not have been merged, I can understand the tone of the reply, not just from frustration but maybe even some actual panic about job security. Depending on how AMD's management takes this news, some of the people who wrote this patch may not have a job in a little while if the merge doesn't happen. I'm trying to be sympathetic.

jfim 10y ago
Considering AMD is bleeding money, I assume it was pretty hard as well to get someone to sign off on getting headcount/resources to write Linux drivers.