netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v1] bonding: cosmetic/readability changes for admin, oper-key ops

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: <CAF2d9jgJQ-xKNBQmt-3LVt=Yg_taLpLnTrvFBkjUhz_HgUh0sg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 7 Apr 2015 11:08:07 -0700
From:	Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	j.vosburgh@...il.com, andy@...yhouse.net, vfalico@...il.com,
	nikolay@...hat.com,
	Maciej Żenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>,
	linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1] bonding: cosmetic/readability changes for
 admin, oper-key ops

On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 2:01 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>
> Date: Fri,  3 Apr 2015 13:54:00 -0700
>
>> Signed-off-by: Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>
>
> This is a very low quality patch submission.
>
> You aren't explaining what you are really doing, or why.
>
> Furthermore:
>
>> @@ -1756,8 +1758,6 @@ static void ad_initialize_port(struct port *port, int lacp_fast)
>>               port->actor_system_priority = 0xffff;
>>               port->actor_port_aggregator_identifier = 0;
>>               port->ntt = false;
>> -             port->actor_admin_port_key = 1;
>> -             port->actor_oper_port_key  = 1;
>>               port->actor_admin_port_state = AD_STATE_AGGREGATION |
>>                                              AD_STATE_LACP_ACTIVITY;
>>               port->actor_oper_port_state  = AD_STATE_AGGREGATION |
>
> This is not just a readability or cosmetic change, it is changing behavior.
>
> You need to describe why removing these initializers is valid, and also
> this change is outside of the scope of a cosmetic/readability change so
> would need to be split into another patch.
>
> It is almost never correct to have an empty commit log message, espcially
> when real changes are being made to the code as is happening here in this
> code block.

These are bogus initializers but I agree that this piece deserves a
separate patch with an explanation. Rest of the patch is nothing but
code-re-factoring (breaking rich assignment to simpler, multiple
assignments, removing duplicate code etc.) to make it readable. I
though it wont be necessary to add that into the commit log since it's
very obvious hence I kept it empty.  Will break it into two patches
and send it again.

Thanks,
--mahesh..
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html