linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] docs: 5.Posting.rst: describe Fixes: and Link: tags

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:   Mon, 03 Jan 2022 15:51:40 -0700
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:     Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     workflows@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] docs: 5.Posting.rst: describe Fixes: and Link: tags

Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info> writes:

> Explain Fixes: and Link: tags in Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst,
> which are missing in this file for unknown reasons and only described in
> Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
> CC: Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@...uxfoundation.org>
> ---
> Lo! If there is still a chance I'l like to get this patch into v5.17, as

I think that should be possible.  Send me a version with Randy's
comments addressed; I also had one nit below...

> during my work as regression tracker I noticed quite a few developers
> seem to be unaware how the Link: tag should be used. Maybe in parts
> that's because Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst doesn't describe it
> yet, which described things from a another different angle than
> Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst.
>
> Ciao, Thorsten
>
> v1:
> - First version as stand alone patch. It used to be the first patch of
>   this series that got abandoned after RFC/v2:
>   https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1639042966.git.linux@leemhuis.info/
>   Patch itself is unchanged, patch description slighly changed. Might
>   later submit other changes from that series seperately, too, still
>   unsure.
> ---
>  Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst b/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst
> index 855a70b80269..e7b919070210 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst
> @@ -197,14 +197,29 @@ the build process, for example, or editor backup files) in the patch.  The
>  file "dontdiff" in the Documentation directory can help in this regard;
>  pass it to diff with the "-X" option.
>  
> -The tags mentioned above are used to describe how various developers have
> -been associated with the development of this patch.  They are described in
> -detail in
> -the :ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst <submittingpatches>`
> -document; what follows here is a brief summary.  Each of these lines has
> -the format:
> +The tags already briefly mentioned above are used to provide insights how
> +the patch came into being. They are described in detail in the
> +:ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst <submittingpatches>`
> +document; what follows here is a brief summary.
>  
> -::
> +One tag is used to refer to earlier commits which had problems fixed by
> +the patch::

I would s/had/introduced/

Thanks,

jon