----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alexander Holler" <hol...@ahsoftware.de> > To: "Tom St Denis" <tstde...@elliptictech.com> > Cc: "Borislav Petkov" <b...@alien8.de>, "Eric Dumazet" <erdnet...@gmail.com>, > "Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" > <peter.p.waskiewicz...@intel.com>, "David Miller" <da...@davemloft.net>, > "steffen klassert" > <steffen.klass...@secunet.com>, herb...@gondor.apana.org.au, > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, net...@vger.kernel.org, > "Michal Kubecek" <mkube...@suse.cz>, "Mike Galbraith" <bitbuc...@online.de> > Sent: Sunday, 20 January, 2013 8:34:20 AM > Subject: Re: IPsec AH use of ahash > > Am 20.01.2013 13:56, schrieb Tom St Denis: > > > You should really try running checkpatch.pl over code that's > > already in the kernel before you call out new contributors on it. > > > > How is this supposed to not be adversarial when I can't even use > > the Kernel source itself as a reference? > > In case of the kernel the chicken and egg problem can be answered > without any questions, most source existed before checkpatch.pl > (evolved > to the current state).
We clearly have different interpretations of the word "maintainer" then... If they're not maintaining the code then are they really the maintainers of it? Point is I copied accepted kernel code and was rejected because of "errors" that are in existing kernel code. Similarly if I did the upgrade to AH to use AEAD I suspect it would be rejected for the same reason. Tom -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
