linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cxl/mbox: Fix debug message print

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, 31 Jul 2023 22:25:37 +0000
From:   "Verma, Vishal L" <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>
To:     "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        "Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        "jonathan.cameron@...wei.com" <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>,
        "dave@...olabs.net" <dave@...olabs.net>,
        "Schofield, Alison" <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
        "Weiny, Ira" <ira.weiny@...el.com>
CC:     "linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org" <linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cxl/mbox: Fix debug message print

On Mon, 2023-07-31 at 15:12 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> Ira Weiny wrote:
> > The handle value used to report an event being cleared by dev_dbg() is
> > incorrect due to a post increment of the payload handle index.
> > 
> > Delay the increment of the index until after the print.  Also add the
> > debugging for event processing which was useful in finding this bug.
> > 
> > To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
> > To: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>
> > To: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>
> > To: Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>
> > To: Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>
> > To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
> 
> Is this some new process recommendation to use "To:", I would only
> expect Cc: for maintainers.
> 
> > Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
> 
> Jonathan gets listed twice because?
> 
> > Cc: linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org
> > Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> 
> I assume this is because b4 takes its address from the patch itself?
> 
> It just feels a bit too noisy.

Yes - but the better way to do this is to add the To: and Cc: lines in
b4 prep --edit-cover, even for a single patch branch. That way b4 uses
them to figure out where to send/cc, but other doesn't add them to
commit messages (or even the cover letter in case there is one).