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  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:   Sun, 14 Jun 2020 09:12:35 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc:     Kaitao Cheng <pilgrimtao@...il.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
        Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
        Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] proc/fd: Remove unnecessary variable initialisations
 in seq_show()

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 06:45:57PM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > 'files' will be immediately reassigned. 'f_flags' and 'file' will be
> > overwritten in the if{} or seq_show() directly exits with an error.
> > so we don't need to consume CPU resources to initialize them.
> 
> I suggest to improve also this change description.
> 
> * Should the mentioned identifiers refer to variables?
> 
> * Will another imperative wording be preferred?
>   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=b791d1bdf9212d944d749a5c7ff6febdba241771#n151
> 
> * I propose to extend the patch a bit more.
>   How do you think about to convert the initialisation for the variable “ret”
>   also into a later assignment?
> 
> Regards,
> Markus

Hi,

This is the semi-friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman.

Markus, you seem to have sent a nonsensical or otherwise pointless
review comment to a patch submission on a Linux kernel developer mailing
list.  I strongly suggest that you not do this anymore.  Please do not
bother developers who are actively working to produce patches and
features with comments that, in the end, are a waste of time.

Patch submitter, please ignore Markus's suggestion; you do not need to
follow it at all.  The person/bot/AI that sent it is being ignored by
almost all Linux kernel maintainers for having a persistent pattern of
behavior of producing distracting and pointless commentary, and
inability to adapt to feedback.  Please feel free to also ignore emails
from them.

thanks,

greg k-h's patch email bot

Powered by blists - more mailing lists