[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1dee801c-37b5-4d72-b33f-ebdc135b4f25@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 13:35:07 +0200
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kernel/module: Delete an error message for a failed memory
allocation in add_module_usage()
>>>> Omit an extra message for a memory allocation failure in this function.
>>>>
>>>> This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
>>>
>>> Applied to modules-next, thanks.
>>
>> Thanks for your acceptance of this update suggestion after a bit of clarification.
>>
>> Do you see any need that I should extend subsequent commit messages
>> for this software transformation pattern?
>
> Add a description of _why_ this is being done.
>
> Something like:
>
> "because there is a dump_stack() done on allocation failures
> without __GFP_JNOWARN"
How do you think about to convert such a description into a special format
for further reference documentation?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists