linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/57] power: Upgrade to ux500 battery management driver

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: <20120928003655.GA5765@lizard>
Date:	Thu, 27 Sep 2012 17:36:55 -0700
From:	Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@...aro.org>
To:	Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dwmw2@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/57] power: Upgrade to ux500 battery management driver

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 04:08:43PM -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
[...]
> I am half way through your comments - some I can handle myself, for
> others I needed to go back to the original author for clarification.
> Another set will follow shortly.

Yeah, I understand that it's mostly not your patches. All the patches
passed my 'sanity' tests, i.e. it was all checkpatch clean, warnings and
sparse clean, so I was quite relaxed about this series.

But taking a closer look, I see there are some serious issues. And of
course that the main problem with the patches is that patch descriptions
often insufficiently (if at all) decribe the reasoning behind the changes.

With time it will get even worse: nobody would be able to reach the
authors, or they will no longer remember the details.

So, I guess it's in everybody's interest to fix it.

Thanks,
Anton.
--
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/