linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] USB: PHY: JZ4770: Fix static checker warning

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

Message-ID: <20200825100030.GA1347872@kroah.com>
Date:   Tue, 25 Aug 2020 12:00:31 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc:     周琰杰 <zhouyanjie@...yeetech.com>,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        Dongsheng Qiu <dongsheng.qiu@...enic.com>,
        Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>,
        qipengzhen <aric.pzqi@...enic.com>,
        Rick Tyliu <rick.tyliu@...enic.com>,
        Yanfei Li <yanfei.li@...enic.com>, zhenwenjin@...il.com,
        周正 <sernia.zhou@...mail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] USB: PHY: JZ4770: Fix static checker warning

On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 11:35:16AM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > The commit 2a6c0b82e651 ("USB: PHY: JZ4770: Add support for new
> > Ingenic SoCs.") introduced the initialization function for different
> > chips, but left the relevant code involved in the resetting process
> > in the original function, resulting in uninitialized variable calls.
> 
> * Can another imperative wording be helpful for the change description?
>   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=d012a7190fc1fd72ed48911e77ca97ba4521bccd#n151
> 
> * How do you think about to mention any source code analysis tool here?
> 
> * Would an other commit subject be more appropriate?
> 
> 
> > Fixes: 2a6c0b82e651 ("USB: PHY: JZ4770: Add support for new
> > Ingenic SoCs.").
> 
> Please omit a line break for this tag.
> 
> 
> I find that a single patch would not need a cover letter.

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