linux-kernel - Re: backlight-tosa: Delete owner assignment

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:	Mon, 15 Aug 2016 15:25:42 +0200
From:	SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:	Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
	Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: backlight-tosa: Delete owner assignment

>> The field "owner" is set by core. Thus delete an extra initialisation.
> 
> Just a small nit on the patch title: "delete owner assignment" is
> virtually useless as a title because it has no meaning without the
> broader context and only describes the literal change. It's like
> naming a patch "add a line" or "change the code";
> it serves no purpose.

I have got an other impression.

Do you want that I add any more background information to the
commit message?


> How about "backlight-tosa: delete _unnecessary_ assignment"?

Will the underlined key word trigger any related software
development concerns?

Would another look be needed on how the usage of the mentioned data
structure element was reduced over time?

Regards,
Markus