linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0254/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro

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:	Tue, 2 Aug 2016 11:08:32 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Steve Wise <swise@...ngridcomputing.com>
Cc:	'Baole Ni' <baolex.ni@...el.com>, swise@...lsio.com,
	dledford@...hat.com, sean.hefty@...el.com,
	hal.rosenstock@...il.com, airlied@...ux.ie, kgene@...nel.org,
	k.kozlowski@...sung.com, dougthompson@...ssion.com, bp@...en8.de,
	linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	chuansheng.liu@...el.com, hch@...radead.org, matanb@...lanox.com,
	markb@...lanox.com, jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com,
	dean.luick@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0254/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro

On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 09:12:54AM -0500, Steve Wise wrote:
> Acked-by: Steve Wise <swise@...ngridcomputing.com>
> 

I have to ask, why did you ack all these? There's several things wrong with
this patch series, but even the point of the patch is mistaken. It makes
readable code much less readable. When you chmod a file, do you type

  chmod 0444 file

or do you write

  chmod S_IRUSR|S_IRGRP|S_IROTH file

?

Which of the above is easier to figure what is being changed?

Not to mention, because the subject is the same for all 1285 patches, and you
deleted the content of the patch in your ack, there's no way to know what
exactly this ack is for (I haven't received the original patch yet because
it's probably being ratelimited by some mail server).

-- Steve