linux-kernel - Re: Fix quilt merge error in acpi-cpufreq.c

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 15 Apr 2009 16:11:47 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, hpa@...or.com,
	tglx@...utronix.de, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	davej@...hat.com
Subject: Re: Fix quilt merge error in acpi-cpufreq.c

On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> So do you consider it wrong to summarize impact?

No.

NOBODY is arguing against talking about what the thing does.

We're arguing against the string "Impact:", which is nonsensical.

> Does this argument extend to other summaries as well, such as the title 
> itself?

Umm. The summary line that doesn't have such a made-up nonsensical prefix?

Ingo, you're missing the _point_.

Summaries and good description of patches are GOOD.

The "Impact:" string is just noise.

Talk about how it was a cleanup all you want, and by all means talk about 
what the intention of it was. Nobody argues against that. What we argue 
against is ugly language. 

Describe the changes in real sentences.

		Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/