Yeah, The Register can often be witty and irreverent, and I wouldn't complain about that, but that kind of wit only works if there's an actual point behind it. Jumping on the apparently popular bandwagon of squeezing out "drama" from the Linux kernel mailing list isn't adding anything of value.
It also seems a bit ignorant to call the submission "half-baked" just because it needed to be worked on and because someone pointed that out (also) in a slightly irreverent way.
All of those points you bring up about the feedback they got seem like just business as usual for a larger merge of code to a carefully developed FOSS project.
It doesn't build, but the person who pointed it out also supplied a diff to make it happen.
It also fails a few tests, but Paragon are more than happy to see if they can make it a bit more compliant.
UBSan finds a few potential bugs, but again, Paragon are more than happy to fix the problems.
There's some style guide suggestions, which Paragon seem to immediately take on board:
> The patch will be splitted in v2 file-wise. Wasn't clear initially which way will be more convenient to review.
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/2911ac5cd20b46e397be506268718d7...