linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3] hp_sdc: convert struct timeval to ktime

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, 23 Oct 2015 20:19:46 +0800
From:	Pingbo Wen <pingbo.wen@...aro.org>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	y2038@...ts.linaro.org, dmitry.torokhov@...il.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] hp_sdc: convert struct timeval to ktime_t


> 在 2015年10月23日，19:45，Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> 写道：
> 
> On Friday 23 October 2015 19:29:39 WEN Pingbo wrote:
>> 1. struct timeval is not y2038 safe, convert it to ktime_t, and there is no need to handle sec and usec separately
>> 
>> 
> 
> The patch looks good now, but the changelog still needs a tiny bit of
> work. First of all, your line wrapping is off, please start a new line
> after around 70 characters as you do in an email.
> 

Well, little fault:)
Will be fixed in next version.

> Also, we don't normally have enumerated lists in a changelog, just use
> normal text. The best changelogs typically have three paragraphs:
> 
> The first paragraph describes what the driver currently does. For really
> obvious cases, this can be combined with the second paragraph.
> 
> The second paragraph explains why that is bad. This is where you can
> mention the monotonic time vs real time issue and say whether we
> just want the timeval removed to fix the kernel in general or whether
> this particular driver is broken.
> 
> The third paragraph explains what the patch does to resolve the issue
> described in the second one. This is also where you can list other
> approaches that would have solved the problem, and why you picked on
> over the others.

Do we really need this in ChangeLog? Commit msg already states this. I think
the purpose of ChangeLog is let people know the main difference of two
version patch at a glance, and the ‘what’ and ‘why’ should be placed in
commit msg.

Pingbo--
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/