linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: update IOMAP FILESYSTEM LIBRARY and XFS FILESYSTEM

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]

Message-ID: <0d629b54-a29c-aeed-1330-840b1b98a8a3@loongson.cn>
Date:   Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:55:39 +0800
From:   Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>
To:     "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: update IOMAP FILESYSTEM LIBRARY and XFS
 FILESYSTEM



On 04/12/2022 11:50 AM, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 08:39:17PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 11:21:26AM +0800, Tiezhu Yang wrote:
>>> Remove the following section entries of IOMAP FILESYSTEM LIBRARY:
>>>
>>> M:	linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org
>>> M:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
>>>
>>> Remove the following section entry of XFS FILESYSTEM:
>>>
>>> M:	linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>
>>
>> WTF?
>>
>>  ▄▄   ▄   ▄▄   ▄    ▄
>>  █▀▄  █   ██   █  ▄▀
>>  █ █▄ █  █  █  █▄█
>>  █  █ █  █▄▄█  █  █▄
>>  █   ██ █    █ █   ▀▄
>
> *OH*, I see, you're getting rid of the M(ail): entry, probably because
> it's redundant with L(ist): or something??  Still... why does it matter?

Yes, the section entries are redundant. Sorry for the unclear description.

The intention of this patch is to clean up the redundant section entries.

>
> Seriously, changelogs need to say /why/ they're changing something, not
> simply restate what's already in the diff.

OK, thank you. Should I send a v2 patch to update the commit message
or just ignore this patch?

Thanks,
Tiezhu