linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v2] Resource: fix region

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: <09d44b21-9739-417b-a76c-5383fcbde96b@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 14:42:05 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
 "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org,
 Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
 Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>,
 Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
 Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
 Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>, Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
 Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
 Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] Resource: fix region_intersects() for CXL memory

On 05.09.24 14:36, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 01:08:35PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 05.09.24 12:56, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 04:58:20PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>>>> Huang, Ying wrote:
>>>>> Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> writes:
> 
> [..]
> 
>>>>>> You may move Cc list after '---', so it won't unnecessarily pollute the commit
>>>>>> message.
>>>>>
>>>>> Emm... It appears that it's a common practice to include "Cc" in the
>>>>> commit log.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, just ignore this feedback, it goes against common practice. Cc list
>>>> as is looks sane to me.
>>>
>>> It seems nobody can give technical arguments why it's better than just keeping
>>> them outside of the commit message. Mantra "common practice" nowadays is
>>> questionable.
>>
>> Just look at how patches look like in the git tree that Andrew picks up.
>> (IIRC, he adds a bunch of CCs himself that are not even part of the original
>> patch).
> 
> I know that and it's historical, he has a lot of the scripts that work and when
> he moved to the Git it was another long story. Now you even can see how he uses
> Git in his quilt approach. So, it's an exceptional and not usual workflow, hence
> bad example. Try again :-)

Point is, it doesn't matter what we do in this patch here if Andrew will 
unify it at all.

> 
>> Having in the git tree who was actually involved/CCed can be quite valuable.
>> More helpful than get_maintainers.pl sometimes.
> 
> First of all, there is no guarantee they _were_ involved. From this perspective
> having Link: tag instead has much more value and supports my side of arguments.

Link is certainly preferable. Usually when I fix a commit, I make sure 
to CC the people that are listed for the patch, because it at least 
should have ended up in their mailbox.

Often, it also helped to see if a buggy commit was at least CCed to the 
right persons without digging through mailing list archives.

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb