linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] dmaengine: qcom: gpi: remove unused struct 'reg

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]

Message-ID: <3fe6e86d-5b4d-4b3c-a5d7-59f01dc6b0bc@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 23:58:41 +0100
From: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>
To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <linux@...blig.org>
Cc: Frank.li@....com, vkoul@...nel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
 dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] dmaengine: qcom: gpi: remove unused struct 'reg_info'

On 17/05/2024 12:19, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
>> If you look at the V1 I had
>> ''gpi_desc' seems like it was never used.
>> Remove it.'
>>
>> but Frank suggested copying the subject line; so I'm not sure
>> whether you want more or less!
>>
>> I could change this to:
>>
>> 'gpi_desc' was never used since it's initial
>> commit 5d0c3533a19f ("dmaengine: qcom: Add GPI dma driver")
> Oops, of course I mean 'reg_info' which is what I fixed in v2.
> 
>> Would you be OK with that?
> Dave
> 
>> Dave

Hi Dave,

I saw your v1 interaction after commenting but, I still think commits 
that say "this removes a data structure" should elaborate more.

"This structure is no longer used since commit: 12charsubshahere" or 
"This structure was never used and should be considered dead code"

I generally hope the intention of my commits is clear from the code with 
the commit log adding whatever context or elaboration on top.

So that's what I'm suggesting here. A bit of commit log sugar on top 
which elaborates on and justifies the change.

---
bod