linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] bitmap changes for v6.0-rc1

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 4 Oct 2022 10:55:51 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] bitmap changes for v6.0-rc1

On Sun, Oct 2, 2022 at 7:03 PM Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Please pull this patches. They spent more than a week in -next without
> major problems. The only problem with warnings generated by cpumask_check(),
> when robots do bisection, is fixed by moving the patch "cpumask: fix
> checking valid cpu range" to the very end of the series.

So I appreciate the commentary about process just to explain what's going on.

But what I want for the merge message is a summary of what the pull
actually *does* - the process commentary is good addition, but it's
not useful for the merge commit message about what the merge actually
brings in.

And for that, I do *not* want explanations like this:

> This branch is based on v6.0-rc4 and includes:
>
> drivers/base: Fix unsigned comparison to -1 in CPUMAP_FILE_MAX_BYTES
> From Phil Auld
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220906203542.1796629-1-pauld@redhat.com/
...

where the explanations just point to external data.

Commit messages are supposed to be self-sufficient. External links can
be acceptable as a "this has subtle issues that are too boring and
extensive to explain here", but even then it's only for _additional_
commentary, not a replacement for explaining what is going on.

And those external links aren't even that. They are literally just the
"this is where the patches were posted originally". Not useful.

So I'm dropping this as not having enough explanations of why I should
pull them. It has explanations, yes, but they are about secondary
things, not about the actual expected improvements brought in by the
pull.

               Linus