[Libre-soc-bugs] [Bug 1169] Add ELF and mmap support to ISACaller -- no dynamic linking

[bugzilla-daemon at libre-soc.org]

https://bugs.libre-soc.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1169

--- Comment #25 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl at lkcl.net> ---
(In reply to Jacob Lifshay from comment #24)
> (edit: trim context)
> 
> (In reply to Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton from comment #23)
> > 
> > no, we get *exactly the same money* even if the scopevs increased!
> > come on for god's sake jacob GET A GRIP. we are UNDER TIME PRESSURE
> 
> no matter how much time pressure we're under, if we do too little work for
> the amount being paid the auditors will likely complain...so, we need to
> justify why EUR 6000 is appropriate for the scope we end up with.

correct. the complexity is enough in this case.
please stop arguing and get on with it.

> 
> One possible way to justify that is to increase the monthly rate we're
> asking, since some other NLNet-funded projects ask for a lot more ($57/hr
> here):
> https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/forgefed-nlnet-grant-application/2598/7
> but, unless we apply that new rate for all future budget estimations, it
> will look suspicious...

no it will not. please be more flexible, stop arguing, and get on with it.

> If you want to reduce the scope, then we can drop the stuff specifically
> needed for dynamically linked binaries, 

good enough.

but that only decreases the scope by
> like 30%, 

GREAT. find more to cut.

> Also, being under time pressure is a good reason to let me keep working on
> the parts we know we need (mmap and then ELF loading, they were in the
> original plan and in the revised version) while we figure out what else we
> need.

ADAPT 

> because adding page permissions isn't MASSIVELY increasing the scope, the
> page permissions code (on master) is 1 flags enum and a dict containing the
> flags for each page and 4 lines of code checking the flags -- imo pretty
> minor.

it was NOT DISCUSSED AND AUTHORIZED.

you have been doing this consistently and repeatedly for years and i am sick of
it.

> 
> (I'm not counting the code to speed up iterating (for debug logging and test
> cases) through the memory by tracking what's changed which we would need
> anyway since it is several orders of magnitude faster.)

DO NOT do optimisations.

> based off the budget estimate, if we included everything I most recently
> proposed, I should finish by around the end of Dec if I start working now.

MUCH too late.

> If we remove dynamically linked binaries from the scope, then I estimate
> I'll be done by the middle of Dec if I start working now based off the EUR
> 3300 left in the budget estimate.

go go go get fricking on with it and DO NOT add anything more ok?
do not even ASK to add any more.

mid-december when we have the other crypto tasks to get one is seriously
pusjing it.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.