linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mmc: reduce nesting and join error strings into one line

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]

Date:	Fri, 15 Apr 2016 13:03:08 +0200
From:	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To:	Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Cc:	linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Chaotian Jing <chaotian.jing@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: reduce nesting and join error strings into one line

On 15 April 2016 at 12:14, Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> wrote:
> 2016-04-15 18:36 GMT+09:00 Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>:
>> On 15 April 2016 at 11:30, Masahiro Yamada
>> <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> wrote:
>>> 2016-04-15 18:26 GMT+09:00 Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>:
>>>> On 15 April 2016 at 11:01, Masahiro Yamada
>>>> <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Ulf,
>>>>>
>>>>> No interest in this clean-up?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, no.
>>>>
>>>> Don't get me wrong, I am interested in clean-ups, but this doesn't
>>>> improve code quality that much.
>>>>
>>>
>>> At least, current code splits the error message string into two lines.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yes, and that minor improvement also makes it more cumbersome to use
>> "git blame" when trying to understand why something was changed.
>>
>> Hopes that clarifies how I think. It's balance. :-)
>
> OK.  This balance slightly varies from maintainer to maintainer.
>
> I am quite new to this sub-system, so I need to learn your criteria.
>
> I spent some time to read the MMC core code before starting to write
> my own MMC driver.
> During diving into the code, I left some tiny patches,
> which I think clean-ups(, but perhaps sound cumbersome for you).
>
> So, please give me your 1 minute to learn how your bar's height.
>
> For example, is the following above or below your bar?
> https://github.com/masahir0y/linux-yamada/commit/fe4e4bc06

This one is good. Although not because of changing to use the BIT
macro, but because you remove an unnecessary check.

>
> If welcome, I am happy to post it, of course.
> but if not, please feel free to say so.

Feel free to post it. Hopes this clarifies!

Kind regards
Uffe