linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/4] ASoC: Intel: bytcr_rt5640: Use temporary variable for struct device

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: <YV3QBsj2gLzmePWE@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 6 Oct 2021 19:34:14 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Cezary Rojewski <cezary.rojewski@...el.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <liam.r.girdwood@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jie Yang <yang.jie@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/4] ASoC: Intel: bytcr_rt5640: Use temporary variable
 for struct device

On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 05:20:04PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 07:05:47PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 04:48:57PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 06:44:07PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 08:21:01AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> 
> > > > > Some will complain about a lack of commit message.
> 
> > > > Yeah, sorry for that, it wasn't deliberate. I forgot to run `git msg-filter`
> > > > on these three patches to add it.
> 
> > > > Mark, do you want me resend entire bunch(es) or just starting from these
> > > > patches? Or...?
> 
> > > If you're adding a commit message with automation it's probably not
> > > adding any value.
> 
> > What do you mean? I add it exceptionally for the same (by nature) patches.
> > What do you expect to be altered in these three, if the idea behind the change
> > is very well the same?
> 
> I really don't care if there's a separate changelog for trivial patches
> like this, it adds nothing of value.

I see. In any case I'll add something meaningful here.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko