5 ms·
>We basically at this point assuming bad faith for all UMN patches This seems like a gross overreaction to three commits that didn't even make it into mainline
by kapp_in_life 6y ago
>We basically at this point assuming bad faith for all UMN patches
This seems like a gross overreaction to three commits that didn't even make it into mainline. Especially when done for commits years before the "research" was done. But I suppose nobody can miss a chance to let loose a little outrage
- Denvercoder9 6y agoThere were more than three buggy commits, at least one of which is from this month
- kapp_in_life 6y agoOther than the three in question no others were intentionally buggy. https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/YIBMKSovJumS79SR@pendragon.ideasonboard.com/ https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/YIBMKSovJumS79SR@pendragon.idea... Best to spend time auditing every commit in the kernel for bugs rather than grandstanding over the commits from one university's members.
- Denvercoder9 6y agoThey admit newer commits are part of a research effort and were sent with the intent to get feedback, but they didn't actually disclose any of that in the patch description [1]. Furthermore, lots of these patches are at best useless and at worst actively introduce bugs. It's famously hard to distinguish malice from incompetence, but I don't think assuming bad faith is out of line here. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nfs/YH%2FfM%2FTsbmcZzwnX@kroah.com/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nfs/YH%2FfM%2FTsbmcZzwnX@kroah...
- thu2111 6y agoHow do you know? These people already attempted to manipulate the kernel maintainers repeatedly, even after being caught. Nothing they claim about their own work can be trusted.
- kapp_in_life 5y ago"These people" being every student/faculty member at the University of Minnesota for the past few years?