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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 17:43:04 +0000 From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> To: Laszlo Papp <lpapp@....org> Cc: sameo@...ux.intel.com, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: (max8997) Handle the potential error for mfd_add_devices > Why is that bad? Cannot you just reply to the "top-post" sentence with > dropping all the quotes below if that is what you wish? Yes, only quote what you're replying to and quote _below_. > >> > Please read and inwardly digest: > >> > Documentation/email-clients.txt > >> > >> I have read that, however I still have certain restrictions here which > >> are over the kernel community rules. That should not block a useful > >> contribution in my opinion. > > > > Your email client does not prevent you from replying inline, which > > you've proven by this email. Please abide by the rules if you're going > > to contribute. > > Yes, I can spend more effort with it inconveniently, Great, thanks. <snip> > > Please read: > > Documentation/SubmittingPatches > > > > Specifically No2. > > I had read that, but as written, I am not sure what more you want to > add. Should I replicate the title in the body, pretty much? Please be > specific, and write what you would like to see in the body. I will > copy/paste it. Currently, I am not sure. A good commit for your patch might look like this: mfd: max8997: Enforce mfd_add_devices() return value check The original author provided a random return value check which is redundant and seemingly floating. This patch not only relocates the check so it is more clearly associated with the invokation of mfd_add_devices(), but provides a store for the error value. We also print a meaningful message on error before returning. > > It's not my responsibility to fixup your patches for you. It's your > > job to ensure they are correct on submission. I am happy to review > > them for you and provide you with my comments, which I have done. > > > > Either fix them up and re-submit or don't. It's no skin off my nose. > > Well, maintainers do it from time to time they apply changes when it > only needs a minor nitpick modification like this in the commit > message, but it is no problem. I am fine the linux kernel not having > this error check, at least for now. :-) It's better that you do it yourself. If I fixed up everything that was sent to me incorrect a) I'd have no time left and b) they'd never learn. This is about teaching a man to fish. > > The $SUBJECT line does not conform to what's expected of MFD commits. > > The $SUBJECT line is vague and you are missing a commit body. > > As written, I am lost what I would need to add to the commit message. > Please advise, and I will copy and paste that before resending. > > > Why have you removed this line? > > That is just noise. It is better not to remove it, thanks. > > > We're adding devices here, not cells. > > "failed to add devices" > > That description is not chosen by me. Actually, that is coming from > the other mfd drivers, particularly from the other existing MAXIM mfd > driver. I would not personally break the consistency there. Please reply to the patch in question, or else things could get confusing. -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists