linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 17/17] xen: disable MSI

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]

Message-ID: <20090527222520.GA26193@elte.hu>
Date:	Thu, 28 May 2009 00:25:20 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, jeremy@...p.org, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com,
	gregkh@...e.de, jens.axboe@...cle.com, chrisw@...hat.com,
	kurt.hackel@...cle.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	ksrinivasan@...ell.com, jbeulich@...ell.com, avi@...hat.com,
	jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/17] xen: disable MSI


* David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:

> From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 08:34:22 -0700 (PDT)
> 
> > I hate them. They are stupid. 90% of all the impact lines I see 
> > are either (a) misleading or (b) totally inane and pointless.
> 
> I just delete any Impact lines I see in patches sent to me, and I 
> honestly suggest you do so as well.

Still you committed a fair number of them already:

earth4:~/tip> git log net/ | grep Impact:
    [...]
    Impact: Attribute functions with __acquires(...) resp. __releases(...).
    Impact: Attribute function with __releases(...)
    Impact: Remove redundant variable declarations, resp. rename
    Impact: Attribute functions with __acquires(...) resp. __releases(...).
    Impact: Include header file.
    Impact: Use 'static const char[]' instead of 'static char[]', and
    Impact: Trust in the comment and add '__force' to the cast.
    Impact: Attribute function with __acquires(...) resp. __releases(...).

btw., these are one of the weirdest impact lines i've ever seen.

You seem to dismiss them unconditionally and indiscriminately, 
without giving any thought to why good impact lines might be useful. 

Good impact lines _are_ really useful to me in my everyday 
maintenance workflow - while bad impact lines indeed are not.
So i try to commit and pull good ones only.

I challenge you to count the number of bad impact lines in the 
current pending x86-next tree, compared to the number of good impact 
lines there.

	Ingo
--
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/