linux-kernel - Re: + fix-mult_frac-multiple-argument-evaluation-bug.patch added to mm-nonmm-unstable branch

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, 23 May 2023 12:41:20 +0200
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mm-commits@...r.kernel.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: + fix-mult_frac-multiple-argument-evaluation-bug.patch added to
 mm-nonmm-unstable branch

On Tue, May 23 2023 at 11:48, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 01:45:40AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> Changelogs have to be self explanatory and if the shortlog, aka
>> $subject, claims "bug" then there has to be a reasonable explanation
>> what the actual bug is.
>> 
>> Seriously.
>> 
>> All this is documented, but obviously documention for changelogs and the
>> acceptance of patches is just there to be ignored, right?
>
> I don't want to return to kindergarten and document problem which every
> C programmer learns exploring MIN(a, b).

A quick summary what the bug is, is _not_ kindergarten level.

Why does a reviewer have to do his own analysis at the patch level to
figure out what this solves and fixes?

It's 20 seconds of courtesy on the submitter side which saves a lot of
time on the reviewer and maintainer side.

Thanks,

        tglx