linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] hrtimers: doc cleanup

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 21 Apr 2016 21:36:32 +0800
From:	Cao jin <caoj.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
CC:	<tglx@...utronix.de>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hrtimers: doc cleanup



On 04/21/2016 09:23 PM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 18:25:41 +0800
> Cao jin <caoj.fnst@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
>>> This change is incorrect - "unacceptable" is exactly what the writer
>>> wanted to say here.
>>>
>> *it cannot be 'designed out' without inevitably degrading other portions
>> of the timers.c code in an unacceptable way*
>>
>> equals
>>
>> *it can be 'designed out' ... in an acceptable way*, I think.
>>
>> So, just from semantics, my feeling is, *it cannot be 'designed out' in
>> an acceptable way* is the reason why integration is hard. Am I still wrong?
>
> The original author, clearly, was talking about the degradation being
> unacceptable.  It seems clear enough, I don't think that change should be
> made.
>

Thanks, will remove the change in v2

-- 
Yours Sincerely,

Cao jin