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, 10 Jun 2016 08:14:06 +0200
From:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:	Chen Gang <chengang@...ndsoft.com.cn>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, trivial@...nel.org,
	vdavydov@...tuozzo.com, hannes@...xchg.org, davem@...emloft.net,
	tj@...nel.org, riel@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH trivial] include/linux/memcontrol.h: Clean up code only

On Fri 10-06-16 08:40:30, Chen Gang wrote:
> 
> On 6/9/16 23:46, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > That's being said, I appreciate an interest in making the code cleaner
> > but try to think whether these changes are actually helpful and who is
> > going to benefit from them.
> > 
> 
> For me, another readers can get benefit more or less from it: if read a
> simple line can know the whole thing (function work), why need we read
> multiple lines?

Yes I understand that this is a matter of taste but as I've said above.
I do not see this would add a benefit to justify the change.

If you are doing a reformating or white space cleanups always try to
think about those who want/need to dig into the history to understand
the code and this would add an additional step to get to the original
commit which is added the code. This is just wasting of time.

Now this would be much more tolerable when the code in question was a
maze but this is not the case.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ