linux-kernel - Re: [greybus-dev] [PATCH v2] staging: greybus: Convert uart.c from IDR to XArray

Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Date:   Mon, 16 Aug 2021 10:10:04 -0500
From:   Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Alex Elder <elder@...nel.org>, kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, greybus-dev@...ts.linaro.org,
        "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [greybus-dev] [PATCH v2] staging: greybus: Convert uart.c from
 IDR to XArray

On 8/16/21 10:06 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 05:01:02PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 09:46:08AM -0500, Alex Elder wrote:
>>> On 8/14/21 1:11 PM, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
>>>> Convert greybus/uart.c from IDR to XArray. The abstract data type XArray
>>>> is more memory-efficient, parallelisable, and cache friendly. It takes
>>>> advantage of RCU to perform lookups without locking. Furthermore, IDR is
>>>> deprecated because XArray has a better (cleaner and more consistent) API.
>>>
>>> I haven't verified the use of the new API (yet) but I have a few
>>> comments on your patch, below.
>>>
>>> 					-Alex
>>>
>>>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fmdefrancesco@...il.com>
>>>
>>> I'm not sure I'm right about this...  But the actual change you're
>>> making has nothing to do with what the Intel test robot reported.
>>> I personally find the "Reported-by" here a little misleading, but
>>> maybe the "Link" line that gets added will provide explanation.
>>>
>>> Anyway, unless someone else contradicts/corrects me, I'd rather
>>> not have the "Reported-by" here (despite wanting to provide much
>>> credit to <lkp@...el.com>...).
>>
>> You are correct, "Reported-by:" does not make sense here.
> 
> There should be a Fixes-from: tag for bugs found in review (not style
> issues) but when I suggest it then people just say to use the
> Reported-by tag.

I think things caught during review aren't normally worthy
of specific mention in the commit message (though maybe in
the non-committed part under "---").  I mean, that's what
review is for.  And in the case of what <lkp@...el.com>
does, that's effectively a technical aspect of "review."

So I don't think "Fixes-from" (whatever that means) or
"Reported-by" make sense for this type of update.

					-Alex

> 
> regards,
> dan carpenter
> 
> _______________________________________________
> greybus-dev mailing list
> greybus-dev@...ts.linaro.org
> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/greybus-dev
> 

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