linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] docs & checkpatch: allow Closes tags with links

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: <cf5a3e73-c97d-4f98-80d7-4bcc68eb557a@spud>
Date:   Fri, 31 Mar 2023 11:08:43 +0100
From:   Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
To:     Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
CC:     Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@...sares.net>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@...il.com>,
        Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>,
        Kai Wasserbäch <kai@....carbon-project.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <mptcp@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] docs & checkpatch: allow Closes tags with links

On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 11:39:22AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

> -Please check the link to make sure that it is actually working and points
> -to the relevant message.
> +If the URL points to a bug report that is fixed by the patch, use 'Closes:'
> +instead.

This is not specifically a comment about your additional diff, but this
sprang to mind (again) while reading it.
I have been wondering if this sort of thing will lead to inconsistency. 
Reports sometimes report more than one issue at once. Other times a
patch that is (intentionally) not a complete fix for the problem.
Using Closes: in those cases is not really true, as it does not close
the report.
Having a series of N patches, each of which purport to close an issue,
also doesn't seem quite right.
The word Closes has a meaning and "forcing" the use of Closes: for
reports implies meaning that may not be present.

I suppose it is true that just because documentation or checkpatch says
to do something, doesn't mean that you **have** to do it but I don't
want to be the one on the Rx side of a rant...

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)