| 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: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 08:30:43 +1100 From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org> To: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com> Cc: Tsutomu OWA <tsutomu.owa@...hiba.co.jp>, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, mingo@...e.hu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 2/6 -rt] powerpc 2.6.20-rt8: to convert spinlocks to raw ones. Sergei Shtylyov writes: > I've floowed up to my patch with such explanation. In the context of an-rt > patch itself, it was just too clear, hence I didn't go into explanations in > the patch itself. :-) Well, it might be clear, to you, now, with the context in your head. But if such a patch is to go into a git tree, and somebody comes along in 3 years time and wants to know exactly why you made that change (and maybe that somebody is you :), then they will need more detail - such as how you came to the conclusion that those locks and no others needed to be changed, for instance. At least give some of the reasoning behind your choice of which locks to convert, so that in future, if the patch turns out to have introduced a bug somehow, the person debugging it can either identify that there was a flaw in your logic, or else understand something that you have seen that they missed. Paul. - 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