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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20160421072323.7afb27b4@lwn.net>
Date:	Thu, 21 Apr 2016 07:23:23 -0600
From:	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:	Cao jin <caoj.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	<tglx@...utronix.de>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hrtimers: doc cleanup

On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 18:25:41 +0800
Cao jin <caoj.fnst@...fujitsu.com> wrote:

> > 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?

The original author, clearly, was talking about the degradation being
unacceptable.  It seems clear enough, I don't think that change should be
made.

Thanks,

jon