4 ms·

The person confidently submitting this without understanding what they're doing is a serious problem. The kernel maintainers only have so much time. Spending it

The person confidently submitting this without understanding what they're doing is a serious problem. The kernel maintainers only have so much time. Spending it reviewing things that should have never made it to their inbox is going to piss them off.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
spongebobstoes 3y ago
Being frustrated with the quality of someone's work is understandable. With a bit of practice it's possible to give the same feedback, but in a way that will encourage and teach, instead of what this was.
- BiteCode_dev 3y ago
  Teaching is way less efficient than filtering, unfortunately. I used to think we should strive to make everybody grow. But the more I've been confronted with hard challenges and limited resources, the more I've had to filter out. Now I lean toward "filter first, teach to what remains, repeat". And yes, being tactless is a very good filter, even give the obvious side effects.
  - LastTrain 3y ago
    You’re just rationalizing your own bad behavior - it’s lazy.
    - BiteCode_dev 3y ago
      Virtue signaling is lazier.
      - LastTrain 3y ago
        2016 terminology for shutting down people calling out bad behavior. Lazy. Going to call me a Karen next? Seriously, the world is not your sock puppet, boss. You’ll get just as much done being decent.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- kulahan 3y ago
  He did teach, if you read his words and don't take them personally - there were great explanations for why things were bad. Even still, as the man at the top, it's not really his job to encourage and teach. Nobody emails the CEO of their org with a terrible idea due to complete lack of context, and then gets support from everyone saying "I can't believe he didn't take the time out of his day to nicely explain why you were wrong here!"
  - charcircuit 3y ago
    Linus is not the CEO of the Linux Foundation. His job is to review kernel patches. This email was not sent directly to Linus. Even if it isn't his job to encourage and teach it isn't his job to be unnecessarily rude in his reviews.
    - kulahan 3y ago
      I know this - he's still a man whose time is in massive demand, and wasting it is a problem.
CoastalCoder 3y ago
It sounds like people are assuming the author should have known better. Is there some forum in which he could/should have vetted the patch before making this submission? (Sincere question. I'm not very familiar with submitting kernel patches.)
- withinboredom 3y ago
  How about ALL OF GOOGLE? Surely, someone there could have reviewed his code.
- dpe82 3y ago
  Google has a large number of experienced and dedicated kernel engineers who are well versed; it should have gone through thorough internal review with them first.
- keep_reading 3y ago
  I can't speak to the current organizational structure but historically there's Linus and a few others at the center (e.g, Greg KH) and then you have circles of trust extending out. Someone is the key person for subsystem A and they trust someone below them for driver or widget B and you're expected to pass your patches through these channels and by the time they make it to Linus's inbox you should have a branch/patch with commits that follow all the rules and are ready for a final QA inspection, essentially. Sometimes people and corporations with enough clout manage to slip by the normal processes and this is the result.
eviks 3y ago
It isn't a serious problem if they have so much time to spare to write email threads like that one
groby_b 3y ago
If reviews of bad code can waste their time to the extent that it's a serious problem, the kernel maintainers failed to set up a sustainable process. If there is a volume of things that shouldn't get to your inbox, you make sure you have filters in place, you don't berate the senders. Screaming loudly instead of addressing your own failure is of course a choice, but it's not a great one.
- Kbelicius 3y ago
  > If reviews of bad code can waste their time to the extent that it's a serious problem, the kernel maintainers failed to set up a sustainable process. This patch is coming from google, are you suggesting that google just be added to some black list they have?
  - groby_b 3y ago
    No, I'm not suggesting a blacklist. I'm not sure why you'd think "sustainable process" implies a blacklist. What I am suggesting is that if you're so stressed out by the time you spend on reviewing things that you yell at people, maybe you should hand of some of the reviews to somebody else. (Especially if you believe, as OP - but not Linus - did that it "should have never made it to their inbox") Yes, I understand that there's a limited number of kernel reviewers. And if the number is too low to deal with the flood of change requests, that's the definition of an unsustainable process.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

spongebobstoes 3y ago

Being frustrated with the quality of someone's work is understandable. With a bit of practice it's possible to give the same feedback, but in a way that will encourage and teach, instead of what this was.

BiteCode_dev 3y ago
Teaching is way less efficient than filtering, unfortunately. I used to think we should strive to make everybody grow. But the more I've been confronted with hard challenges and limited resources, the more I've had to filter out. Now I lean toward "filter first, teach to what remains, repeat". And yes, being tactless is a very good filter, even give the obvious side effects.
- LastTrain 3y ago
  You’re just rationalizing your own bad behavior - it’s lazy.
  - BiteCode_dev 3y ago
    Virtue signaling is lazier.
    - LastTrain 3y ago
      2016 terminology for shutting down people calling out bad behavior. Lazy. Going to call me a Karen next? Seriously, the world is not your sock puppet, boss. You’ll get just as much done being decent.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
kulahan 3y ago
He did teach, if you read his words and don't take them personally - there were great explanations for why things were bad. Even still, as the man at the top, it's not really his job to encourage and teach. Nobody emails the CEO of their org with a terrible idea due to complete lack of context, and then gets support from everyone saying "I can't believe he didn't take the time out of his day to nicely explain why you were wrong here!"
- charcircuit 3y ago
  Linus is not the CEO of the Linux Foundation. His job is to review kernel patches. This email was not sent directly to Linus. Even if it isn't his job to encourage and teach it isn't his job to be unnecessarily rude in his reviews.
  - kulahan 3y ago
    I know this - he's still a man whose time is in massive demand, and wasting it is a problem.

CoastalCoder 3y ago

It sounds like people are assuming the author should have known better. Is there some forum in which he could/should have vetted the patch before making this submission? (Sincere question. I'm not very familiar with submitting kernel patches.)

withinboredom 3y ago
How about ALL OF GOOGLE? Surely, someone there could have reviewed his code.
dpe82 3y ago
Google has a large number of experienced and dedicated kernel engineers who are well versed; it should have gone through thorough internal review with them first.
keep_reading 3y ago
I can't speak to the current organizational structure but historically there's Linus and a few others at the center (e.g, Greg KH) and then you have circles of trust extending out. Someone is the key person for subsystem A and they trust someone below them for driver or widget B and you're expected to pass your patches through these channels and by the time they make it to Linus's inbox you should have a branch/patch with commits that follow all the rules and are ready for a final QA inspection, essentially. Sometimes people and corporations with enough clout manage to slip by the normal processes and this is the result.

eviks 3y ago

It isn't a serious problem if they have so much time to spare to write email threads like that one

groby_b 3y ago

If reviews of bad code can waste their time to the extent that it's a serious problem, the kernel maintainers failed to set up a sustainable process. If there is a volume of things that shouldn't get to your inbox, you make sure you have filters in place, you don't berate the senders. Screaming loudly instead of addressing your own failure is of course a choice, but it's not a great one.

Kbelicius 3y ago
> If reviews of bad code can waste their time to the extent that it's a serious problem, the kernel maintainers failed to set up a sustainable process. This patch is coming from google, are you suggesting that google just be added to some black list they have?
- groby_b 3y ago
  No, I'm not suggesting a blacklist. I'm not sure why you'd think "sustainable process" implies a blacklist. What I am suggesting is that if you're so stressed out by the time you spend on reviewing things that you yell at people, maybe you should hand of some of the reviews to somebody else. (Especially if you believe, as OP - but not Linus - did that it "should have never made it to their inbox") Yes, I understand that there's a limited number of kernel reviewers. And if the number is too low to deal with the flood of change requests, that's the definition of an unsustainable process.