linux-kernel - Re: arch/x86/kernel/apic/x2apic_uv_x.c:106 early_get

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:50:27 -0700
From:   Mike Travis <mike.travis@....com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Cc:     kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>, kbuild-all@...ts.01.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Dimitri Sivanich <dimitri.sivanich@....com>,
        Steve Wahl <steve.wahl@....com>,
        Yang Li <yang.lee@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: arch/x86/kernel/apic/x2apic_uv_x.c:106 early_get_pnodeid() warn:
 inconsistent indenting

Thanks Boris, I do have a clean up patch to remove more dead code 
coming, I'll put this patch in that if that's okay?

On 4/22/2021 2:06 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 06:38:37PM -0700, Mike Travis wrote:
>> I'm a bit confused.  I have this in my inbox that someone else has this fix.
>> So will that fix be applied or should I send a separate one that is
>> essentially a duplicate?
> 
> I'm not even considering that fix because I'm tired of getting some
> half-baked robot mails which only resemble patches. The obnoxiousness to
> not have the decency to sit down and write a proper commit message is
> getting totally out of control.
> 
> Apparently some people(?) think that sending robot output to real humans
> *without* even vetting that output is a good idea so off to /dev/null it
> goes.
> 
> If you want this fixed, you could do a proper patch with a sensible
> commit message and I'll take it.
> 
> I'm tired of dumb robots.
> 
> Thx.
> 
>