linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/intel-mid: modify a code to suppress a warning

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:	Fri, 9 Oct 2015 16:01:43 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/intel-mid: modify a code to suppress a warning

On Fri, 9 Oct 2015, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

Please stop to write subject lines like this.

     x86/intel-mid: modify a code to suppress a warning

This is completely useless as it does not tell what kind of warning
(compile time, runtime). Further it says that the patch modifies
code, which is completely pointless, right?

What's wrong with:

     x86/intel-mid: Make intel_mid_ops static

I end up rewriting your subject lines and changelogs on a regular
base. You really should have noticed that by now and started to spend
a little bit more effort yourself.

Thanks,

	tglx

--
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/