linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 01/12] mm/shmem: add `const` to lots of pointer parameters

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: <CAKPOu+8YMLrtqbhhQ0SgfQN2xErVhZCLEoStRL-YJy-SeHE8ng@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2025 12:00:47 +0200
From: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@...os.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: Kiryl Shutsemau <kirill@...temov.name>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, 
	axelrasmussen@...gle.com, yuanchu@...gle.com, willy@...radead.org, 
	hughd@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-mm@...ck.org, lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, 
	vbabka@...e.cz, rppt@...nel.org, surenb@...gle.com, vishal.moola@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/12] mm/shmem: add `const` to lots of pointer parameters

On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 11:53 AM David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
> I'm sorry, I have no time to argue about the basics of writing a patch
> description. I even proposed a simple example of what we (multiple
> reviewers) would expect as a bare minimum.

But Lorenzo Stoakes and Mike Rappoport wanted much more than that.

> If you feel like you need other rules than everybody else here

What other rules? I get confused by different requirements by different people.

Quite contrary - I want the same rules as everybody else. For example,
the same rules as Matthew Wilcox who already submitted similar patches
(with similar commit messages) that were merged without pushing him
around.