linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-bcm-qspi: style: Simplify bool comparison

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: <20210111172930.GI4728@sirena.org.uk>
Date:   Mon, 11 Jan 2021 17:29:30 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc:     YANG LI <abaci-bugfix@...ux.alibaba.com>, kdasu.kdev@...il.com,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-bcm-qspi: style: Simplify bool comparison

On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 09:21:11AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 1/11/21 9:05 AM, Mark Brown wrote:

> > Honestly for super trivial stuff like this I'm not sure it's a useful
> > use of anyone's time to police this sort of stuff aggressively, it's
> > after the prefixes that matter so I saw it easily and I'm having a hard
> > time caring that it happens to be done as a prefix rather than saying
> > style somewhere else in the subject.

> That sounds fair, however it does look like people who submit trivial
> patches are typically the ones that also tend not to follow prior
> commits to the same file, and given the patch is trivial, enforcing a
> consistent subject sort of offsets the less amount of time spent in
> reviewing the patch.

Yeah, I do tend to moan if the commonly used prefixes aren't there but
I tend not to worry about anything after that.

> > I will generally hold off for longer with these trivial patches on
> > things where I expect to see some review but that's felt a bit patchy
> > with the Broadcom drivers.

> OK, we will try to be more reactive then, Kamal is in GMT-0500 and I am
> GMT-0800 so it make take a bit of time for us to get to our review backlog.

To be clear it's more that if there's generally a review of any patch
within say a week or a few days or something then I'll hold off until it
materializes but if it's likely to time out then I'll tend to just go
ahead immediately.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)