Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2021 02:44:37 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org> To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> Cc: Kyle Evans <kevans@freebsd.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org>, "dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org" <dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org>, "dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org" <dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: git: 74ae3f3e33b8 - main - if_wg: import latest fixup work from the wireguard-freebsd project Message-ID: <20210316024437.GA60113@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <13F91280-2246-4A7B-BAC2-B9ABA07B561F@samsco.org> References: <202103150452.12F4qxjV047368@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <13F91280-2246-4A7B-BAC2-B9ABA07B561F@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 08:56:56AM -0600, Scott Long wrote: > Here is the response I sent to you and Donenfeld in private. I won't > include my direct conversation with you from Slack/IRC, but I made my > concerns and objections pretty clear. This commit is quite > disappointing. FWIW, original wireguard commit seemed more disappointing to me. > - The LKML wouldn't accept this kind of submission, they'd insist > that it be broken down into consumable pieces, and that bug fixes be > considered and provided that don't rely on massive re-writes. Didn't Linux folks also refuse to accept wireguard code until it was ported from some home-grown "hey, let's do crypto stuff ourselves!" implementation to their standard kernel APIs? > - An accusation was made, tonight, to me, that the code Netgate > sponsored was not reviewed and was shoved into the tree at the last > minute. This grossly ignores the actual history to the point of > weakening my tolerance for this entire discussion. It shows a > pretty irrational bias against mmacy [...] Slightly tangential note, but my questions to mmacy@ about original wireguard commit (and ZoL, FWIW) or Phabricator comments had not been answered; I also recall reviews being closed in "not accepted" state by him. While I appreciate the heavy-lifting, developers should be ready to explain and sometimes defend their work on public forums. > - The removal of the ASM crypto bits really confuses me. But addition of the new crypto code, bypassing our crypto framework in the first place did not? Anyway, I'm really happy to see Jason's work; looks like sanity is something FreeBSD can, once again, be known for. ;-) ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20210316024437.GA60113>