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

Message-ID: <1444403436.8361.550.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 09 Oct 2015 18:10:36 +0300
From:	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
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, 2015-10-09 at 16:01 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> 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.

Thank you.

> 
> Thanks,
> 
>         tglx
> 
> 

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy
--
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/