[RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Josh Law]

Hello, (this is my first RFC, so maybe cc is bad, but yeah)

What do you guys have planned/would like me to have a look at doing in
lib/string.c

I am home from school so I am virtually free 


Thanks!

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 03:57:16PM +0100, Josh Law wrote:
> Hello, (this is my first RFC, so maybe cc is bad, but yeah)
> 
> What do you guys have planned/would like me to have a look at doing in
> lib/string.c
> 
> I am home from school so I am virtually free

Arbitrary things that came to my mind (no particular order)

- Get rid of strlcat()
- Clean up include/linux/string.h
  a) drop extern for functions
  b) put the headers it includes into an order and follow IWYU
- kill memscan() in favour of memchr() / memchr_inv()

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Josh Law]

On 22 April 2026 17:12:37 BST, Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 03:57:16PM +0100, Josh Law wrote:
>> Hello, (this is my first RFC, so maybe cc is bad, but yeah)
>> 
>> What do you guys have planned/would like me to have a look at doing in
>> lib/string.c
>> 
>> I am home from school so I am virtually free
>
>Arbitrary things that came to my mind (no particular order)
>
>- Get rid of strlcat()

Yeah, I'm working on that actually :D, privately, I sorta stopped cuz i
thought kees was gonna do that, if not, not issue!

>- Clean up include/linux/string.h
>  a) drop extern for functions
>  b) put the headers it includes into an order and follow IWYU

Hmm, yeah, I see it's kind of a mess (in a polite way) 

>- kill memscan() in favour of memchr() / memchr_inv()

Hmm, maybe, is there a crazy amount of files that call memscan()?

I'll also (try ;), yk, school :( ) to review patches for your file. Ig
it's the best I do for you lot right now, (I am starting to review most
if not all patches in lib), e.g:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/AA9B2A7E-A88D-457C-8244-50087631B347@gmail.com
:)


Thanks!

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 05:28:39PM +0100, Josh Law wrote:
> On 22 April 2026 17:12:37 BST, Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote:
> >On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 03:57:16PM +0100, Josh Law wrote:
> >> Hello, (this is my first RFC, so maybe cc is bad, but yeah)
> >> 
> >> What do you guys have planned/would like me to have a look at doing in
> >> lib/string.c
> >> 
> >> I am home from school so I am virtually free
> >
> >Arbitrary things that came to my mind (no particular order)
> >
> >- Get rid of strlcat()
> 
> Yeah, I'm working on that actually :D, privately, I sorta stopped cuz i
> thought kees was gonna do that, if not, not issue!
> 
> >- Clean up include/linux/string.h
> >  a) drop extern for functions
> >  b) put the headers it includes into an order and follow IWYU
> 
> Hmm, yeah, I see it's kind of a mess (in a polite way) 
> 
> >- kill memscan() in favour of memchr() / memchr_inv()
> 
> Hmm, maybe, is there a crazy amount of files that call memscan()?

You can find an answer yourself. The daily-basis kill feature tool is
`git grep ...`.

> I'll also (try ;), yk, school :( ) to review patches for your file. Ig
> it's the best I do for you lot right now, (I am starting to review most
> if not all patches in lib), e.g:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/AA9B2A7E-A88D-457C-8244-50087631B347@gmail.com
> :)

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Josh Law]

On 22 April 2026 17:51:40 BST, Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 05:28:39PM +0100, Josh Law wrote:
>> On 22 April 2026 17:12:37 BST, Andy Shevchenko
>> <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote:
>> >On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 03:57:16PM +0100, Josh Law wrote:
>> >> Hello, (this is my first RFC, so maybe cc is bad, but yeah)
>> >> 
>> >> What do you guys have planned/would like me to have a look at doing
>in
>> >> lib/string.c
>> >> 
>> >> I am home from school so I am virtually free
>> >
>> >Arbitrary things that came to my mind (no particular order)
>> >
>> >- Get rid of strlcat()
>> 
>> Yeah, I'm working on that actually :D, privately, I sorta stopped cuz i
>> thought kees was gonna do that, if not, not issue!
>> 
>> >- Clean up include/linux/string.h
>> >  a) drop extern for functions
>> >  b) put the headers it includes into an order and follow IWYU
>> 
>> Hmm, yeah, I see it's kind of a mess (in a polite way) 
>> 
>> >- kill memscan() in favour of memchr() / memchr_inv()
>> 
>> Hmm, maybe, is there a crazy amount of files that call memscan()?
>
>You can find an answer yourself. The daily-basis kill feature tool is
>`git grep ...`.

Oh, yes, I see this now, I should be able to do this, gotta slap the
computer awake cuz sometimes it breaks. So it may take time for me
to submit it, would you like a treewide cleanup, or subsystem by subsystem

Thanks!

>> I'll also (try ;), yk, school :( ) to review patches for your file. Ig
>> it's the best I do for you lot right now, (I am starting to review most
>> if not all patches in lib), e.g:
>>
>https://lore.kernel.org/all/AA9B2A7E-A88D-457C-8244-50087631B347@gmail.com
>> :)
>
>

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 05:56:38PM +0100, Josh Law wrote:
> On 22 April 2026 17:51:40 BST, Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote:
> >On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 05:28:39PM +0100, Josh Law wrote:
> >> On 22 April 2026 17:12:37 BST, Andy Shevchenko
> >> <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote:
> >> >On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 03:57:16PM +0100, Josh Law wrote:
> >> >> Hello, (this is my first RFC, so maybe cc is bad, but yeah)
> >> >> 
> >> >> What do you guys have planned/would like me to have a look at doing
> >in
> >> >> lib/string.c
> >> >> 
> >> >> I am home from school so I am virtually free
> >> >
> >> >Arbitrary things that came to my mind (no particular order)
> >> >
> >> >- Get rid of strlcat()
> >> 
> >> Yeah, I'm working on that actually :D, privately, I sorta stopped cuz i
> >> thought kees was gonna do that, if not, not issue!
> >> 
> >> >- Clean up include/linux/string.h
> >> >  a) drop extern for functions
> >> >  b) put the headers it includes into an order and follow IWYU
> >> 
> >> Hmm, yeah, I see it's kind of a mess (in a polite way) 
> >> 
> >> >- kill memscan() in favour of memchr() / memchr_inv()
> >> 
> >> Hmm, maybe, is there a crazy amount of files that call memscan()?
> >
> >You can find an answer yourself. The daily-basis kill feature tool is
> >`git grep ...`.
> 
> Oh, yes, I see this now, I should be able to do this, gotta slap the
> computer awake cuz sometimes it breaks. So it may take time for me
> to submit it, would you like a treewide cleanup, or subsystem by subsystem

It depends case by case. As Kees' patch shows in some cases it may touch too
many things to be treewide and has to be subsystem / driver focused.

> >> I'll also (try ;), yk, school :( ) to review patches for your file. Ig
> >> it's the best I do for you lot right now, (I am starting to review most
> >> if not all patches in lib), e.g:
> >>
> >https://lore.kernel.org/all/AA9B2A7E-A88D-457C-8244-50087631B347@gmail.com
> >> :)

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Josh Law]

[Snip!] 

>> Oh, yes, I see this now, I should be able to do this, gotta slap the
>> computer awake cuz sometimes it breaks. So it may take time for me
>> to submit it, would you like a treewide cleanup, or subsystem by
>subsystem
>
>It depends case by case. As Kees' patch shows in some cases it may touch
>too
>many things to be treewide and has to be subsystem / driver focused.

Hmm, okay, thanks for the help!

[Snip!]

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Kees Cook]

On April 22, 2026 12:23:47 PM PDT, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 05:56:38PM +0100, Josh Law wrote:
>> On 22 April 2026 17:51:40 BST, Andy Shevchenko
>> <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote:
>> >On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 05:28:39PM +0100, Josh Law wrote:
>> >> On 22 April 2026 17:12:37 BST, Andy Shevchenko
>> >> <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote:
>> >> >On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 03:57:16PM +0100, Josh Law wrote:
>> >> >> Hello, (this is my first RFC, so maybe cc is bad, but yeah)
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> What do you guys have planned/would like me to have a look at doing
>> >in
>> >> >> lib/string.c
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> I am home from school so I am virtually free
>> >> >
>> >> >Arbitrary things that came to my mind (no particular order)
>> >> >
>> >> >- Get rid of strlcat()
>> >> 
>> >> Yeah, I'm working on that actually :D, privately, I sorta stopped cuz i
>> >> thought kees was gonna do that, if not, not issue!
>> >> 
>> >> >- Clean up include/linux/string.h
>> >> >  a) drop extern for functions
>> >> >  b) put the headers it includes into an order and follow IWYU
>> >> 
>> >> Hmm, yeah, I see it's kind of a mess (in a polite way) 
>> >> 
>> >> >- kill memscan() in favour of memchr() / memchr_inv()
>> >> 
>> >> Hmm, maybe, is there a crazy amount of files that call memscan()?
>> >
>> >You can find an answer yourself. The daily-basis kill feature tool is
>> >`git grep ...`.
>> 
>> Oh, yes, I see this now, I should be able to do this, gotta slap the
>> computer awake cuz sometimes it breaks. So it may take time for me
>> to submit it, would you like a treewide cleanup, or subsystem by subsystem
>
>It depends case by case. As Kees' patch shows in some cases it may touch too
>many things to be treewide and has to be subsystem / driver focused.

Traditionally, patches for these kinds of changes (i.e. strlcat) get split per subsystem or per driver, since they're not 1:1 mechanical conversions.

And while I did a couple conversions recently (since I was already looking at the code), it's not on my active TODO right now. Feel free to tackle it!

You can reference https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/370 with a Link tag too.

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Josh Law]

[Snip! :)]

>Traditionally, patches for these kinds of changes (i.e. strlcat) get split
>per subsystem or per driver, since they're not 1:1 mechanical conversions.
>
>And while I did a couple conversions recently (since I was already looking
>at the code), it's not on my active TODO right now. Feel free to tackle
>it!
>
>You can reference https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/370 with a Link tag
>too.

Yes, im tackling it, maybe patch series for each subsystem (e.g: 10/10
series for all files that has the function), is it fine if you do the
documentation removal at the end? (Lol you can *totally* claim all the
credit if 
you do it last)

But, the thing I am heavily intrigued in is the memscan() nuking, only like
14 files call it, it's an easy job!

But my server is not the greatest, so it takes a while for me to do
major patches like these.

Also, removing a whole function in the kernel sounds cool, (There even
was a whole YouTube video about it!)

For now, while I get my server upgraded, I'll review patches for
string, as I understand it.



Kees. Anything for this file on your TODO list you think?

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 22/04/2026 16:57, Josh Law wrote:
> Hello, (this is my first RFC, so maybe cc is bad, but yeah)
> 
> What do you guys have planned/would like me to have a look at doing in
> lib/string.c

Do nothing. As some people already said: go away.

You were lying multiple times, including how you tested the patches and
that you claim you have device being worked on:
"I own this device"
https://lore.kernel.org/all/f8772114-a495-409b-a590-a9b1d8ed1d41@gmail.com/

Even after proving you fabricated absolute AI slop you claimed otherwise:
"The commit descriptions (The long ones), Use AI, to be exact! "

https://lore.kernel.org/all/043CED5F-7014-4776-824E-07E027B7BDC3@objecting.org/

https://lore.kernel.org/all/04B79050-4353-4FD2-A596-1474BDB94B3F@objecting.org/

So no, we do not want you to look at anything. You were told that
multiple times.

Just because one maintainer gives you chance, it still means - don't
touch /lib or any other part of core kernel.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Josh Law]

On 23 April 2026 07:24:50 BST, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
>On 22/04/2026 16:57, Josh Law wrote:
>> Hello, (this is my first RFC, so maybe cc is bad, but yeah)
>> 
>> What do you guys have planned/would like me to have a look at doing in
>> lib/string.c
>
>Do nothing. As some people already said: go away.
>
>You were lying multiple times, including how you tested the patches and
>that you claim you have device being worked on:
>"I own this device"
>https://lore.kernel.org/all/f8772114-a495-409b-a590-a9b1d8ed1d41@gmail.com/
>
>Even after proving you fabricated absolute AI slop you claimed otherwise:
>"The commit descriptions (The long ones), Use AI, to be exact! "
>
>https://lore.kernel.org/all/043CED5F-7014-4776-824E-07E027B7BDC3@objecting.org/
>
>https://lore.kernel.org/all/04B79050-4353-4FD2-A596-1474BDB94B3F@objecting.org/
>
>So no, we do not want you to look at anything. You were told that
>multiple times.
>
>Just because one maintainer gives you chance, it still means - don't
>touch /lib or any other part of core kernel.
>
>Best regards,
>Krzysztof
>

Krzysztof, haven't you been told to _NOT_ interfere/nack my
patches if there is other maintainers? Not being rude, but just
confused.

Thanks!

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 23/04/2026 08:29, Josh Law wrote:
> On 23 April 2026 07:24:50 BST, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
>> On 22/04/2026 16:57, Josh Law wrote:
>>> Hello, (this is my first RFC, so maybe cc is bad, but yeah)
>>>
>>> What do you guys have planned/would like me to have a look at doing in
>>> lib/string.c
>>
>> Do nothing. As some people already said: go away.
>>
>> You were lying multiple times, including how you tested the patches and
>> that you claim you have device being worked on:
>> "I own this device"
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/f8772114-a495-409b-a590-a9b1d8ed1d41@gmail.com/
>>
>> Even after proving you fabricated absolute AI slop you claimed otherwise:
>> "The commit descriptions (The long ones), Use AI, to be exact! "
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/043CED5F-7014-4776-824E-07E027B7BDC3@objecting.org/
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/04B79050-4353-4FD2-A596-1474BDB94B3F@objecting.org/
>>
>> So no, we do not want you to look at anything. You were told that
>> multiple times.
>>
>> Just because one maintainer gives you chance, it still means - don't
>> touch /lib or any other part of core kernel.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>>
> 
> Krzysztof, haven't you been told to _NOT_ interfere/nack my

You're joking or what?

> patches if there is other maintainers? Not being rude, but just
> confused.



Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Josh Law]

On 23 April 2026 07:44:11 BST, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
>On 23/04/2026 08:29, Josh Law wrote:
>> On 23 April 2026 07:24:50 BST, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
>wrote:
>>> On 22/04/2026 16:57, Josh Law wrote:
>>>> Hello, (this is my first RFC, so maybe cc is bad, but yeah)
>>>>
>>>> What do you guys have planned/would like me to have a look at doing in
>>>> lib/string.c
>>>
>>> Do nothing. As some people already said: go away.
>>>
>>> You were lying multiple times, including how you tested the patches and
>>> that you claim you have device being worked on:
>>> "I own this device"
>>>
>https://lore.kernel.org/all/f8772114-a495-409b-a590-a9b1d8ed1d41@gmail.com/
>>>
>>> Even after proving you fabricated absolute AI slop you claimed
>otherwise:
>>> "The commit descriptions (The long ones), Use AI, to be exact! "
>>>
>>>
>https://lore.kernel.org/all/043CED5F-7014-4776-824E-07E027B7BDC3@objecting.org/
>>>
>>>
>https://lore.kernel.org/all/04B79050-4353-4FD2-A596-1474BDB94B3F@objecting.org/
>>>
>>> So no, we do not want you to look at anything. You were told that
>>> multiple times.
>>>
>>> Just because one maintainer gives you chance, it still means - don't
>>> touch /lib or any other part of core kernel.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Krzysztof
>>>
>> 
>> Krzysztof, haven't you been told to _NOT_ interfere/nack my
>
>You're joking or what?

Wait, you haven't been told? To not nack my patches if there are
other maintainers??? I'm confused.

>> patches if there is other maintainers? Not being rude, but just
>> confused.
>
>
>
>Best regards,
>Krzysztof
>

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 23/04/2026 08:46, Josh Law wrote:
> On 23 April 2026 07:44:11 BST, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
>> On 23/04/2026 08:29, Josh Law wrote:
>>> On 23 April 2026 07:24:50 BST, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
>> wrote:
>>>> On 22/04/2026 16:57, Josh Law wrote:
>>>>> Hello, (this is my first RFC, so maybe cc is bad, but yeah)
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you guys have planned/would like me to have a look at doing in
>>>>> lib/string.c
>>>>
>>>> Do nothing. As some people already said: go away.
>>>>
>>>> You were lying multiple times, including how you tested the patches and
>>>> that you claim you have device being worked on:
>>>> "I own this device"
>>>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/f8772114-a495-409b-a590-a9b1d8ed1d41@gmail.com/
>>>>
>>>> Even after proving you fabricated absolute AI slop you claimed
>> otherwise:
>>>> "The commit descriptions (The long ones), Use AI, to be exact! "
>>>>
>>>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/043CED5F-7014-4776-824E-07E027B7BDC3@objecting.org/
>>>>
>>>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/04B79050-4353-4FD2-A596-1474BDB94B3F@objecting.org/
>>>>
>>>> So no, we do not want you to look at anything. You were told that
>>>> multiple times.
>>>>
>>>> Just because one maintainer gives you chance, it still means - don't
>>>> touch /lib or any other part of core kernel.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>
>>>
>>> Krzysztof, haven't you been told to _NOT_ interfere/nack my
>>
>> You're joking or what?
> 
> Wait, you haven't been told? To not nack my patches if there are
> other maintainers??? I'm confused.

Stop inventing stories. One more thing you keep lying about. I will be
NAKing your patches when you keep sending such arrogant emails "I am
representing lib" [1] or you keep pushing untested code to backports [2].

[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/16B7B5A8-EEA7-4580-A565-3A0B4DBB08AB@gmail.com/

[2]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/C9577A36-B531-4480-BEA5-42F660C184CA@gmail.com/

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Josh Law]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2427 bytes --]

On April 23, 2026 7:53:21 AM GMT+01:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
>On 23/04/2026 08:46, Josh Law wrote:
>> On 23 April 2026 07:44:11 BST, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
>wrote:
>>> On 23/04/2026 08:29, Josh Law wrote:
>>>> On 23 April 2026 07:24:50 BST, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> On 22/04/2026 16:57, Josh Law wrote:
>>>>>> Hello, (this is my first RFC, so maybe cc is bad, but yeah)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What do you guys have planned/would like me to have a look at doing
>in
>>>>>> lib/string.c
>>>>>
>>>>> Do nothing. As some people already said: go away.
>>>>>
>>>>> You were lying multiple times, including how you tested the patches
>and
>>>>> that you claim you have device being worked on:
>>>>> "I own this device"
>>>>>
>>>
>https://lore.kernel.org/all/f8772114-a495-409b-a590-a9b1d8ed1d41@gmail.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> Even after proving you fabricated absolute AI slop you claimed
>>> otherwise:
>>>>> "The commit descriptions (The long ones), Use AI, to be exact! "
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>https://lore.kernel.org/all/043CED5F-7014-4776-824E-07E027B7BDC3@objecting.org/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>https://lore.kernel.org/all/04B79050-4353-4FD2-A596-1474BDB94B3F@objecting.org/
>>>>>
>>>>> So no, we do not want you to look at anything. You were told that
>>>>> multiple times.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just because one maintainer gives you chance, it still means - don't
>>>>> touch /lib or any other part of core kernel.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Krzysztof, haven't you been told to _NOT_ interfere/nack my
>>>
>>> You're joking or what?
>> 
>> Wait, you haven't been told? To not nack my patches if there are
>> other maintainers??? I'm confused.
>
>Stop inventing stories. One more thing you keep lying about. I will be
>NAKing your patches when you keep sending such arrogant emails "I am
>representing lib" [1] or you keep pushing untested code to backports [2].
>
>[1]
>https://lore.kernel.org/all/16B7B5A8-EEA7-4580-A565-3A0B4DBB08AB@gmail.com/
>
>[2]
>https://lore.kernel.org/all/C9577A36-B531-4480-BEA5-42F660C184CA@gmail.com/
>
>Best regards,
>Krzysztof
>

"Unfortunately, I really can't. That's not my jurisdiction. **But I did let
Krzysztof know that we met. He may still not take your code, but he'll
refrain from sending out NAKs when you send patches to other
maintainers.**"


Screenshot attached.

That's what I mean. Did you receive a email about that?

[-- Attachment #2: Screenshot_20260423-075553_Chrome.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 259364 bytes --]

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 23/04/2026 08:56, Josh Law wrote:
> On April 23, 2026 7:53:21 AM GMT+01:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Krzysztof, haven't you been told to _NOT_ interfere/nack my
>>>>
>>>> You're joking or what?
>>>
>>> Wait, you haven't been told? To not nack my patches if there are
>>> other maintainers??? I'm confused.
>>
>> Stop inventing stories. One more thing you keep lying about. I will be
>> NAKing your patches when you keep sending such arrogant emails "I am
>> representing lib" [1] or you keep pushing untested code to backports [2].
>>
>> [1]
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/16B7B5A8-EEA7-4580-A565-3A0B4DBB08AB@gmail.com/
>>
>> [2]
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/C9577A36-B531-4480-BEA5-42F660C184CA@gmail.com/
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>>
> 
> "Unfortunately, I really can't. That's not my jurisdiction. **But I did let
> Krzysztof know that we met. He may still not take your code, but he'll
> refrain from sending out NAKs when you send patches to other
> maintainers.**"
> 
> 
> Screenshot attached.
> 
> That's what I mean. Did you receive a email about that?

Really, this is absolutely unacceptable. Now you bring private
conversation to somehow claim I have no rights to NAK your patches.

You grossly violated that little trust people still were willing to give
you.

Steven asked me about situation, we talked, Steven explained what he did
and what he plans to do, and based on that and his explanation, I SAID
to him that I am willing to give you a chance by refraining to NAK
automatically your patches. And that was before you were doing this:

"I am representing lib"
https://lore.kernel.org/all/16B7B5A8-EEA7-4580-A565-3A0B4DBB08AB@gmail.com/

Pushing untested code to backports
https://lore.kernel.org/all/C9577A36-B531-4480-BEA5-42F660C184CA@gmail.com/


Your claim:
"Wait, you haven't been told? To not nack my patches"

is just arrogance and frankly, what the hell. Using that little trust
you got from Steven in this discussion.

So I do revert my "refrain from NAKs". I will be NAKing your patches,
because after all this time nothing improved.


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Thu, Apr 23, 2026 at 09:11:35AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 23/04/2026 08:56, Josh Law wrote:
> > On April 23, 2026 7:53:21 AM GMT+01:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski

...

> >>>>> Krzysztof, haven't you been told to _NOT_ interfere/nack my
> >>>>
> >>>> You're joking or what?
> >>>
> >>> Wait, you haven't been told? To not nack my patches if there are
> >>> other maintainers??? I'm confused.
> >>
> >> Stop inventing stories. One more thing you keep lying about. I will be
> >> NAKing your patches when you keep sending such arrogant emails "I am
> >> representing lib" [1] or you keep pushing untested code to backports [2].
> >>
> >> [1]
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/16B7B5A8-EEA7-4580-A565-3A0B4DBB08AB@gmail.com/
> >>
> >> [2]
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/C9577A36-B531-4480-BEA5-42F660C184CA@gmail.com/
> > 
> > "Unfortunately, I really can't. That's not my jurisdiction. **But I did let
> > Krzysztof know that we met. He may still not take your code, but he'll
> > refrain from sending out NAKs when you send patches to other
> > maintainers.**"
> > 
> > Screenshot attached.
> > 
> > That's what I mean. Did you receive a email about that?
> 
> Really, this is absolutely unacceptable. Now you bring private
> conversation to somehow claim I have no rights to NAK your patches.

Yeah, it's not acceptable to bring the private emails as an evidence.
You need to try to be polite even to the maintainers like Krzysztof.
He has made an opinion about you, and discussing the matter makes
his opinion even stronger. This all strikes back on *your* reputation.

> You grossly violated that little trust people still were willing to give
> you.
> 
> Steven asked me about situation, we talked, Steven explained what he did
> and what he plans to do, and based on that and his explanation, I SAID
> to him that I am willing to give you a chance by refraining to NAK
> automatically your patches. And that was before you were doing this:
> 
> "I am representing lib"
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/16B7B5A8-EEA7-4580-A565-3A0B4DBB08AB@gmail.com/
> 
> Pushing untested code to backports
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/C9577A36-B531-4480-BEA5-42F660C184CA@gmail.com/
> 
> Your claim:
> "Wait, you haven't been told? To not nack my patches"
> 
> is just arrogance and frankly, what the hell. Using that little trust
> you got from Steven in this discussion.
> 
> So I do revert my "refrain from NAKs". I will be NAKing your patches,
> because after all this time nothing improved.

(My upper sentence was done before even reading this. So, as I said,
 you made the situation even worse, and it's all on public...)

Nevertheless, nobody prevents you from reviewing others' work.
Try to be constructive and helpful at least a little bit.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [RFC] [QUESTION] Stuff to do for string

[Steven Rostedt]

On Thu, 23 Apr 2026 10:37:12 +0300
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote:

> > Really, this is absolutely unacceptable. Now you bring private
> > conversation to somehow claim I have no rights to NAK your patches.  
> 
> Yeah, it's not acceptable to bring the private emails as an evidence.
> You need to try to be polite even to the maintainers like Krzysztof.
> He has made an opinion about you, and discussing the matter makes
> his opinion even stronger. This all strikes back on *your* reputation.

Exactly!

Josh,

I defended you because I believed that you were just a young kid that
didn't know any better. I told you time and time again, NOT TO REPLY TO THE
MAILING LIST without consulting me first. You continue to reply, and now
you expose a private email from me to the world? WITHOUT MY PERMISSION!
Especially since you used it out of context and don't appear to understand
what the word "refrain" means. This is a HUGE break in trust!

That's it. You're on your own. You have proven Krzysztof and Lorenzo right
and made me look like a fool in trying to help you. They warned me about
you, but I'm too kind and try to help those even when it looks hopeless.

Don't bother emailing me anymore. You need to do this on your own.

-- Steve