linux-kernel - Re: [v2 01/13] perf parse-events: Remove unused PE_PMU_EVENT

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAP-5=fXjXBSFVDYXw6fXUf35hLDMqS-C4DRC4LWXUcsMNP6gdw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 30 Jun 2023 10:33:31 -0700
From:   Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc:     linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [v2 01/13] perf parse-events: Remove unused PE_PMU_EVENT_FAKE token

On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 10:23 AM Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de> wrote:
>
> >>>>> Removed by commit 70c90e4a6b2f ("perf parse-events: Avoid scanning
> >>>>> PMUs before parsing").
> >>>>
> >>>> Will the chances ever grow to add another imperative change suggestion?
> >>>>
> >>>> See also:
> >>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.4#n94
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Sorry, I can't parse this.
> >>
> >> Can you take the requirement “Describe your changes in imperative mood”
> >> into account for any more descriptions?
> >
> > Yep, still doesn't parse.
>
> Does this feedback really indicate that you stumble still on understanding difficulties
> for the linked development documentation?
>
> Can the mentioned patch review concern be adjusted with wording alternatives
> for improved commit messages?

Sorry, checked with a colleague and kernel contributor, we don't know
what is being requested here, "imperative mood" makes no sense, as
such I don't have a fix for what you're requesting.

Thanks,
Ian

> Regards,
> Markus