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: <20200416100253.GN1163@kadam>
Date:   Thu, 16 Apr 2020 13:02:54 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>
Cc:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "K . Y . Srinivasan" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
        Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>,
        linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] drivers: hv: remove redundant assignment to
 pointer primary_channel

We have this discussion over and over.  I always say it helps to have
the commit mentioned in the commit message but it's not a Fixes tag.
So I think that the commit message should say something like
"commit 1234234 ("blah blah") removed some code so this variable isn't
used any more".  I think it helps the review process.  But then if we
mention the commit everyone says to use the Fixes tag.

It turns out if you leave out the commit entirely then people still
complain but a lot less frequently.  It shouldn't work that way but
reviewers are illogical.

regards,
dan carpenter

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ