linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFT v2] x86: move cacheinfo sysfs to generic cacheinfo infrastructure

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: <54F6EDFE.2040305@arm.com>
Date:	Wed, 04 Mar 2015 11:35:26 +0000
From:	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
CC:	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Andre Przywara <Andre.Przywara@....com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT v2] x86: move cacheinfo sysfs to generic cacheinfo
 infrastructure



On 04/03/15 11:27, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 11:15:49AM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>> I can do that, but wouldn't that add confusion as this commit is not
>> changing that behaviour. It's already changed in v4.0-rc1
>
> Nah, this would add a reference to the fact that the cpumask format is
> not really a stable thing and thus cannot be considered a userpsace
> regression. And having this info is important IMO in case someone is
> wondering in the future.
>

Thanks for clarifying, will add that info. Now I think it completely
makes sense especially since this commit will be the first target when
user-space first notice this cpumask format change.

> In general, having more and even redundant info in the commit messages
> is much better than having less info. I can't count the times I've been
> staring at a one-liner commit message and trying to rhyme up what was
> the purpose of doing it this way.
>
> So more is more, in this case. :-)
>

Agreed :)

--
Regards,
Sudeep

--
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/