linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v18 26/33] fs/resctrl: Introduce mbm_assign_on

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6d3ea767-517d-44e1-bb9b-6ce3c5416193@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2025 10:11:11 -0700
From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC: Babu Moger <babu.moger@....com>, <corbet@....net>, <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	<Dave.Martin@....com>, <james.morse@....com>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	<mingo@...hat.com>, <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, <x86@...nel.org>,
	<hpa@...or.com>, <kas@...nel.org>, <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
	<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <paulmck@...nel.org>, <frederic@...nel.org>,
	<pmladek@...e.com>, <rostedt@...dmis.org>, <kees@...nel.org>,
	<arnd@...db.de>, <fvdl@...gle.com>, <seanjc@...gle.com>,
	<thomas.lendacky@....com>, <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
	<perry.yuan@....com>, <manali.shukla@....com>, <sohil.mehta@...el.com>,
	<xin@...or.com>, <Neeraj.Upadhyay@....com>, <peterz@...radead.org>,
	<tiala@...rosoft.com>, <mario.limonciello@....com>,
	<dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com>, <michael.roth@....com>,
	<chang.seok.bae@...el.com>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev>,
	<kvm@...r.kernel.org>, <peternewman@...gle.com>, <eranian@...gle.com>,
	<gautham.shenoy@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 26/33] fs/resctrl: Introduce mbm_assign_on_mkdir to
 enable assignments on mkdir

Hi Boris,

On 9/11/25 9:54 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 09:24:01AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>> About repeating things: As I see it the annoying repeating results from desire to
>> follow the "context-problem-solution" changelog script while also ensuring each
>> patch stands on its own. With these new features many patches share the same context
>> and then copy&paste results. I see how this can be annoying when going through
>> the series and I can also see how this is a lazy approach since the context is
>> not tailored to each patch. Will work on this.
> 
> Thanks. And I know it makes sense to repeat things to introduce the context
> but let's try to keep that at minimum and only when absolutely necessary.

Will do.
 
>> About too much text that explains the obvious: I hear you and will add these criteria
>> to how changelogs are measured. I do find the criteria a bit subjective though and expect
>> that I will not get this right immediately and appreciate and welcome your feedback until
>> I do.
> 
> Yeah, that's fine, don't worry. But it is actually very simple: if it is
> visible from the diff itself, then there's no need to state it again in text.
> That would be waste of text.
> 
> Lemme paste my old git archeology example here in the hope it makes things
> more clear. :-)
> 
> Do not talk about *what* the patch is doing in the commit message - that
> should be obvious from the diff itself. Rather, concentrate on the *why*
> it needs to be done.
> 
> Imagine one fine day you're doing git archeology, you find the place in
> the code about which you want to find out why it was changed the way it 
> is now.
> 
> You do git annotate <filename> ... find the line, see the commit id and
> you do:
> 
> git show <commit id>
> 
> You read the commit message and there's just gibberish and nothing's
> explaining *why* that change was done. And you start scratching your head,
> trying to figure out why. Because the damn commit message is not worth the
> electrons used to display it with.

Thank you very much. Will use this as changelog benchmark.

 
> This happens to us maintainers at least once a week.
:(

Reinette