linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 17/17] xen: disable MSI

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:	Thu, 28 May 2009 15:51:33 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...hat.com>, kurt.hackel@...cle.com,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ky Srinivasan <ksrinivasan@...ell.com>,
	Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/17] xen: disable MSI

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 27 May 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> hm, i have to concur. Too often it ends up splitting attention away 
>> from the title of the commit. I do reject (or fix up) bad impact 
>> lines - will stop doing them altogether if you think there's a net 
>> downside to them ...
> 
> I actually think that if there is a good reason for them, they can stay. 
> 
> Just don't make it one of those "every commit that goes through me has to 
> have one".
> 
> Pu another way: if they actually add value in highlighting the commits 
> that _should_ stand out, then hey, by all means, keep such ones. I would 
> not at all object if it was an issue of 
> 
>  [ Impact: fix bugzilla entry 455123 ]
> 
> or
> 
>  [ Impact: fix user-triggerable oops ]

Ideally "Impact" is pointless if you are otherwise writing a clear, 
concise commit description.  "Fixes user-triggerable oops" on a line by 
itself is clear enough, and is how I've been writing descriptions for a 
while.

People with the urge to add "Impact:" to every commit wind up either 
being redundant, or for small patches, having the entire ex-Subject 
commit description be "Impact: blah blah blah"

If IOW, if the impact is not already clear, you're doing something 
wrong, and "Impact" is not necessarily going to fix that.

	Jeff



--
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/