linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] hrtimers: doc cleanup

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 21 Apr 2016 18:25:41 +0800
From:	Cao jin <caoj.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
CC:	<tglx@...utronix.de>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hrtimers: doc cleanup

Hi jon
     Thanks for your quick respond for my 1st patch here.

On 04/21/2016 05:56 PM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 17:09:54 +0800
> Cao jin <caoj.fnst@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
>> -  wheel concept, it cannot be 'designed out' without unevitably
>> -  degrading other portions of the timers.c code in an unacceptable way.
>> +  wheel concept, it cannot be 'designed out' without inevitably
>> +  degrading other portions of the timers.c code in an acceptable way.
>
> This change is incorrect - "unacceptable" is exactly what the writer
> wanted to say here.
>
*it cannot be 'designed out' without inevitably degrading other portions 
of the timers.c code in an unacceptable way*

equals

*it can be 'designed out' ... in an acceptable way*, I think.

So, just from semantics, my feeling is, *it cannot be 'designed out' in 
an acceptable way* is the reason why integration is hard. Am I still wrong?

-- 
Yours Sincerely,

Cao jin