At a cost to mostly people who didn't / and I'll even say wouldn't do the bad thing.
The Linux kernel has limited resources and if one university lack of oversight is causing the whole process to be stretched tinner than it already is then a ban seems like a valid solution.
> It's not a ban on people, it's a ban on the institution that has demonstrated they can't be trusted to act in good faith. If people affilated with the UMN want to contribute to the Linux kernel, they can still do that on a personal title. They just can't do it as part of UMN research, but given that UMN has demonstrated they don't have safeguards to prevent bad faith research, that seems reasonable.
https://twitter.com/FiloSottile/status/1384883910039986179
(Clearly the academic behavior is also a problem, there's no good justification for asking for reviews of known bad patches)
UMN hasn't admitted to any wrongdoing. The professor wasn't punished in any form whatsoever. And they adamantly state that their research review processes are solid and worked in this case.
An indefinite ban is 100% warranted until such a time that UMN can demonstrate that their university sponsored research is trustworthy and doesn't act in bad faith.