linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] time: remove useless "const" keyword in ns_to_kernel_old_timeval() and ns_to

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]

Date:   Tue, 12 Jul 2022 16:49:46 +0900
From:   "Chanho Park" <chanho61.park@...sung.com>
To:     "'Arnd Bergmann'" <arnd@...db.de>,
        "'Youngmin Nam'" <youngmin.nam@...sung.com>
Cc:     "'John Stultz'" <jstultz@...gle.com>,
        "'Thomas Gleixner'" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "'Stephen Boyd'" <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        "'Linux Kernel Mailing List'" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <hajun.sung@...sung.com>, <hosung0.kim@...sung.com>,
        <d7271.choe@...sung.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] time: remove useless "const" keyword in
 ns_to_kernel_old_timeval() and ns_to_timespec64()

> > As mentioned below,
> >
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAK8P3a3nknJgEDESGdJH91jMj6R_xydFqWASd8r5Bbes
> dvMBgA@...l.gmail.com/

I'm not sure why you drop my originality but please use my commit message and put this link between --- and include/linux/time32.h if you need additional comments.
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220531064346.51677-1-chanho61.park@samsung.com/T/

Indeed you should put Fixes tag for stable tree.

Best Regards,
Chanho Park

> >
> > The "const" keyword is useless, so we drop it from the function
> definition and declaration.
> >
> > Change-Id: If35bba78aa7757476e22be42afc719c27fb0f527
> > Signed-off-by: Youngmin Nam <youngmin.nam@...sung.com>
> 
> The patch looks good, but the description can be improved:
> 
> - drop the useless Change-Id field
> - move the URL into a 'Link: field'
> - wrap the lines to fit into the normal width of an email (under 80
> characters,
>   ideally 70)
> - explain why the change helps, rather than just stating the keyword is
> useless.
>   In your description, it's not clear if one is better than the other, it
> sounds
>   like it should make no difference.
> 
> With that done:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>