linux-kernel - Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <470B220A.6080102@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date:	Tue, 09 Oct 2007 08:39:06 +0200
From:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
CC:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Scott Preece <sepreece@...il.com>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight

Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 08:11:53AM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote:
>> The SCM changelog should contain _what_ a patch does and if
>> necessary _why_ it does so.
> The _why_ part is more important than _what_. The diff should hopefully
> explain the _what_ part.

"What": fix lockup in this and that circumstances
"Why": because lockups are annoying
"How": the diff
(That's what I meant with what and why.)
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-=== =-=- -=--=
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
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/