[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87o7mbuy7j.ffs@tglx>
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists