linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: atomisp: move null check to earlier point

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200807095320.GI1793@kadam>
Date:   Fri, 7 Aug 2020 12:53:20 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc:     "open list:STAGING SUBSYSTEM" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Cengiz Can <cengiz@...nel.wtf>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: atomisp: move null check to earlier point

Beyond that, though, I feel like the rules are stupid because I've seen
more than a couple commit messages which were contorted to avoid
imperative.  My own standard for commit messages is that 1) Is the
problem explained, especially what it looks like to user space?  2) Is
it clear what the solution is?  3)  Does the patch itself raise any
questions that I can't figure out and which aren't explained in the
commit message.  And I figure I'm not a domain expert but if I can
understand the commit message probably anyone can.

We've got people who speak English as a second language and then start
imposing pointless rules on top?  It's crazy.  I've had to ask someone
recently to redo a commit message and it seemed very obvious they were
focused on nonsense about imperative and avoiding saying "this patch"
to the extent that I literally could not figure out what they were
saying.  When I read the patch, of course, I could see what they were
doing but from the commit message it was impossible.

regards,
dan carpenter