linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drivers/ata: fix repeated words in comments

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: <154c64feea4b2942698c6b96370f78a509048605.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
Date:   Thu, 08 Sep 2022 10:03:56 -0400
From:   James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To:     Conor.Dooley@...rochip.com, wangjianli@...rlc.com,
        damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com
Cc:     linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/ata: fix repeated words in comments

On Thu, 2022-09-08 at 13:09 +0000, Conor.Dooley@...rochip.com wrote:
[...]
> If there's a tool running against this stuff but maintainers are not
> applying the patches as the "fixes" are not fixes it's only going to
> keep generating the same patches over and over is it not?

That's up to the maintainers, but it's fairly easy to ignore patches
from given sources however often they are repeated.  There's a lot of
wrong patches that keep getting repeated ...

My own take is that the value would be marginal if all the patches were
correct, but they could be applied with minimal effort using patch
automation.  Once you have to verify correctness of each patch, I don't
think the tracking and verification effort is worth the marginal
improvement, but that's a maintainer call.

Regards,

James