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: <ZwPtPpKk8SdbXS9h@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2024 17:16:30 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: "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,
	David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
	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 Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 02:37:06PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> 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.
> 
> Yes, question asked and answered. Not to your satisfaction, but the
> people that have engaged to date have been cold to the idea.

It's just matter if we care or not (about the environment, about performance
in reviewing the code, about people who might use small screens or smartphones
for reading the changes, et cetera). Even status quo should be questioned from
time to time.

> Historically, reaching into other kernel developers workflows to
> instantiate a new preference is a high risk low reward endeavor, please
> moderate your advocacy accordingly.

Yeah, I got it...

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko