linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 1/3] i2c: pcf8584: Move 'ret' variable inside for loop, goto out if ret

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: <okcyigt326pn7b4vjo5jir37ppyb6zhb3z7e4irkyykjpjqjot@adqmu3hr4gf2>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2025 17:28:42 +0100
From: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>
To: Cezar Chiru <chiru.cezar.89@...il.com>
Cc: wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/3] i2c: pcf8584: Move 'ret' variable inside for
 loop, goto out if ret < 0.

Hi Cezar,

On Fri, Oct 24, 2025 at 04:55:28PM +0300, Cezar Chiru wrote:
> > > Require spaces around '=' and '<'. Add spaces around binary operators.
> > > Enforce error fixing based on checkpatch.pl output on file.
> > > Move 'ret' variable inside for loop. Then check if (ret < 0) goto out. This
> > > improves usage of ret variable.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Cezar Chiru <chiru.cezar.89@...il.com>
> > > Suggested-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>
> > > Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
> >
> > you don't really need to resend patches for updating the tag
> > list. Anyway, that's OK, better to send than not to send, when in
> > doubt, ask.
> 
> Anyways I had to resend as I grouped 3 patches into 1 patch series
> 
> > For this patch I think neither me or Andy have been suggesting
> > the change. The change came from you, we made observation which
> > you applied, this is the normal review process.
> 
> Can you please let me know the process of tagging with Suggested-by
> without resending the patch. I don't know how people add reviewed-by
> or ACK-ed-by or Suggested-by other than resend the patch?
> I've seen it but have yet to figure how to do it.

with Reviewed-by I understand that you have carefully reviewed
the code line by line, agree with everything written, and do not
see any issues or major improvements to be made.

With Acked-by I understand that you have read the change and
agree with it, but you may not have gone into the fine details.
You are simply OK with the patch being applied.

With Suggested-by I understand that someone has proposed the
entire idea behind the patch, not just smaller improvements or
changes made during review. For example, if I tell you that 'ret'
does not need to be initialised and can be moved inside the for
loop, that comes from review. However, if I suggest sending a new
patch changing the function type, that would justify a
Suggested-by tag.

Then there are other tags, such as Reported-by when someone
reports an issue, and many more that you will learn if you stay
in the community (and I hope you will).

Everything is more or less documented in
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst, and when in doubt,
asking is always the right thing to do.

Again, thank you for your patches,
Andi