[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b44caf20-d3fc-30ac-f716-2375ed55dc9a@web.de>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 20:56:26 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@...sung.com>,
Sungjong Seo <sj1557.seo@...sung.com>,
Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>,
Tetsuhiro Kohada <kohada.t2@...il.com>,
Wei Yongjun <weiyongjun1@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] exfat: add missing brelse() calls on error paths
>>> If the second exfat_get_dentry() call fails then we need to release
>>> "old_bh" before returning. There is a similar bug in exfat_move_file().
>>
>> Would you like to convert any information from this change description
>> into an imperative wording?
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=5b14671be58d0084e7e2d1cc9c2c36a94467f6e0#n151
>
> I really feel like imperative doesn't add anything. I understand that
> some people feel really strongly about it, but I don't know why. It
> doesn't make commit messages more understandable.
Do you insist to deviate from the given guideline?
> The important thing is that the problem is clear, the fix is clear and
> the runtime impact is clear.
I have got further ideas to improve also this commit message.
I am curious if other contributors would like to add another bit of
patch review.
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists