linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3 v2] hyperv: hyperv_fb.c: match wait_for_completion

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20150129104141.GA32124@opentech.at>
Date:	Thu, 29 Jan 2015 11:41:41 +0100
From:	Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@...r.at>
To:	Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com>
Cc:	"K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
	Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
	devel@...uxdriverproject.org, linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3 v2] hyperv: hyperv_fb.c: match
	wait_for_completion_timeout return type

On Thu, 29 Jan 2015, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:

> On 29/01/15 11:38, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> > 
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On 25/01/15 16:47, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> >>> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@...r.at>
> >>> ---
> >>>
> >>> v2: fixed subject line
> >>>
> >>> The return type of wait_for_completion_timeout is unsigned long not
> >>> int. This patch fixes up the declarations only.
> >>>
> >>> Patch was compile tested only for x86_64_defconfig + CONFIG_X86_VSMP=y
> >>> CONFIG_HYPERV=m, CONFIG_FB_HYPERV=m
> >>
> >> Why didn't you set the text above as the patch description (which is
> >> empty at the moment)?
> >>
> > basically because the one-line is sufficient to understand the patch
> 
> You didn't have one line, you had no description. Patch subject is not
> patch description. In the minimal case, the description should have the
> same text as the subject, but usually it's better to have a bit more
> text in the description.

ok - was not clear about this - got it.

> 
> > and the rest of the information is not relevant for the git log but only
> > for the review
> > 
> > if you think it is necessary to understand the patch I'll move it and
> > resubmit.
> 
> Well, a good description is not only about understanding the code in the
> patch. It may contain information like which platform/setup this issue
> happened on, are the any possible side effects, or whatever might be
> relevant for someone looking at the patch years later.
> 
yup - but it seemed to me that the information on the build
config and kernel version details would not really be relevant for
this cleanup patch - so if I got your right the description line should
have gone up and the config/kernel info stays below "---".

Just resent it - hope this is correct now.

thx!
hofrat

--
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/