linux-kernel - Re: + x86-add-support-for-pud-sized-transparent-hugepages-checkpatch-fixes.patch added to -mm tree

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: <20160309165507.GA2464@linux.intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 9 Mar 2016 11:55:07 -0500
From:	Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...e.hu,
	tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: +
 x86-add-support-for-pud-sized-transparent-hugepages-checkpatch-fixes.patch
 added to -mm tree

On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 01:08:08PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > I have no idea what it means.  This is copy-and-change of the pmd version,
> > which was originally commit db3eb96f4e6281b84dd33c8980dacc27f2efe177 by
> > Andrea.
> 
> It means that we don't want to copy-and-change a crappy comment that slipped 
> through 5 years ago, we want to copy-and-improve. I even suggested the comment 
> improvement (which needs to be checked though).

The "it" in my sentence referred to the comment.  I have no idea what
the comment is supposed to mean.  I am the worst person to figure out
what the comment is supposed to mean as I have the least experience with
the code here.

The PUD and PMD code should be as similar as possible, down to the
comments and the spacing.  If you want the original fixed, that's fine,
and I'm willing to include it as part of this patch set.  But it's not
my responsibility to fix up the comments that you don't like.

> > It seems unfair to ask me to do better than what is there right now.
> 
> It's absolutely fair for maintainers to require the improvement of existing code 
> you want to modify, especially when you are complicating existing code ...

I'm not complicating it.  I'm duplicating it.