No, Kent has generally had a nice tone. The issue is that he has repeatedly violated the rules about code contributions. For example by including new features together with several bug-fixes during rc. That is not a CoC issue, it is not respecting the rules of patch submission and not respecting the time of the kernel maintainers.

I agree that is a problem, but the main thing the eye-rolling posts seem to be about is CoC stuff, real or imaginary.

Example of eye-rolling post, above:

> Sadly, Kent responds to everything in an email except the key part that is being pointed out to him (usually his behavior). Or deflects by going on the attack. And generally refuses to apologise.

And there's an email thread linked somewhere here where a CoC member repeatedly replies to Kent's emails with demands for a formal apology. All of this soft, subtle stuff adds up to an impression in people's heads, even though the main output of these projects should be highly complex software, and not bike-shedding email mediation.