linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 00/12] sched: Avoid unnecessary migrations within SMT domains

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]

Date:   Mon, 1 May 2023 21:52:20 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri@...el.com>,
        "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
        Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@....com>, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/12] sched: Avoid unnecessary migrations within SMT
 domains

On Mon, 1 May 2023 18:42:55 -0700
Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com> wrote:

> I am sorry changelogs are not sufficiently clear. I thought stating the
> overall goal in the cover letter was enough. In the future, would you
> prefer that I repeat the cover letter instead of referring to it? Should
> individual changelogs state the overall goal?

Yes. Every commit should have a change log that explains why that commit
was done without having to look elsewhere.

The cover letter should be the summary of what the patches do. But 5 to 10
years from now, when a git bisect comes across a commit, there's no
guarantee that a cover letter will be easily found. The change log may be
the only thing a developer debugging some code will have to understand what
the change was for.

I'm guilty of having poor change logs which I myself suffered from, as I
don't remember what I meant. So I've been more adamant on adding more
detail to my change logs which has saved me a few times.

-- Steve