linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] timerfd: Factor out timer-type unspecific timerfd

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]

Date:	Thu, 20 Feb 2014 20:13:25 -0800
From:	Anton Vorontsov <anton@...msg.org>
To:	Alexey Perevalov <a.perevalov@...sung.com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	john.stultz@...aro.org, anton@...sg.org, kyungmin.park@...sung.com,
	cw00.choi@...sung.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] timerfd: Factor out timer-type unspecific
 timerfd_expire()

On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:52:03AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > From: Anton Vorontsov <anton@...msg.org>
> > 
> > There is nothing hrtimer-specific inside the timerfd_tmrproc(), except
> > the function prototype. We're about to add other timer types, so factor
> > out generic timerfd_expire() helper from timerfd_tmrproc().
> 
> This changelog is completely useless. How is timerfd_tmrproc, which is
> not a function but a function pointer, related to the patch?
> 
> Moving duplicated code to a common function is nice, but ....

> > Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@...aro.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Alexey Perevalov <a.perevalov@...sung.com>
... 
> Warnings are there to be ignored and testing of user space
> interfaces after a change is overrated, right?
> 
> Aside of that you just blindly copied the original code w/o fixing up
> the now unnecessary line breaks.

Alexey,

While I appreciate the desire to be careful with authorship and stuff,
please remove my name as an author of this patch -- the current code has
nothing to do with my original work, and I surely don't want to take any
responsibility for it. This is a common practice if you modify someone's
patch to a great extend.

Thomas is bashing the thing, which has my name on it; although _my_ patch
did not produce any warnings, came with a completely different changelog,
and served completely different purposes.

Instead of rushing with resending yet another series, please actually read
Thomas' review.

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/