Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] x86/purgatory: Make sure we fail the build if purgatory.ro has missing symbols

[Hans de Goede]

Hi,

On 3/12/20 3:25 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 02:34:30PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:

<snip>

> > No not ok, I'm doing my best to help make things better here and
> > in return I'm getting what feels as a bunch of negativity and that
> > is NOT ok!
>
> I have no clue what in my replies made you feel that. Please explain.
> How should I have replied so that it doesn't come across negative?

I posted v3 of this patch 5 months ago, then after 0day bot found
an issue after the resend I send a v4 honestly believing that that
was the only issue with it.

0day bot found another issue, so I send out v5, checking what special
options similar code (EFI libstub) uses to make sure I cover all special
cases this time.

So I've send out 2 versions, not 5 not 10, but only 2 versions in
the past 2 days and you start complaining about me rushing this and
not fixing it properly, to me that does not come across positive.

More specifically my intentions / motives on this were well intended
and I too believe in fixing things the proper way. Your reply suggested
that I just want to rush this through, which calls my motives into
question, for which in my mind there was no reason.

If you complain about 2 versions in 2 days, or 5 versions over 5 months
then that feels exaggerated and it certainly does not give me a feeling
that the effort which I'm putting into this is being appreciated.

Anyways we have a plan how to move forward with this now, so lets
focus on that.

> > Now as how to move forward with this, I suggest that:
> >
> > 1) We wait a bit to see if the 0daybot finds any more existing issues
> > which are exposed by my patch
> >
> > 2) Change my patch to check for missing symbols to use the approach
> > which Arvind has suggested
> >
> > 3) Check that "kexec -l <kernel>" + "kexec -e" still work
> >
> > 4) Post v6.
>
> 5) Wait for 0day bot to chew on it too.
>
> > Does that work for you ?
>
> Yes, sounds ok.

Ok, then lets move forward with this.

Regards,

Hans