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: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 23:40:33 -0200 From: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br> To: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net> Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>, ibm-acpi-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>, Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>, Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <ibm-acpi@....eng.br>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi: Adjustments for four function implementations On Tue, 19 Dec 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > >> Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation in three functions > > > > This one is questionable since it prints error messages at ->init() stage. > > I would rather not touch this. > > Do you find the Linux allocation failure report insufficient in this case? Leave those pr_ messages alone, please, unless they are really causing some sort of issue (which?). > >> Improve a size determination in tpacpi_new_rfkill() > > > > Doesn't make any sense right now. One style over the other. > > Nothing gets better or worth at this point. > > Would you like to care for a bit more compliance with information > from the section “14) Allocating memory” in the document “coding-style.rst”? No, unless the change is actually fixing something, or gives us a down-to-earth, *real* advantage of some sort. In which case, the commit message better do a rather good job of explaining it. Doing it just for "compliance" with a doc isn't nearly good enough reason. -- Henrique Holschuh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists