From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:04:04 +0000 Subject: Re: omapfb/dss: Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation in three functions Message-Id: <1511856244.19952.14.camel@perches.com> List-Id: References: <1511809633.32426.70.camel@perches.com> <1511833514.32426.86.camel@perches.com> <7e7e64cf-dbe5-614a-f1e5-29d7b6cf9297@users.sourceforge.net> In-Reply-To: <7e7e64cf-dbe5-614a-f1e5-29d7b6cf9297@users.sourceforge.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: SF Markus Elfring , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: "Andrew F. Davis" , Arvind Yadav , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Tomi Valkeinen , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2017-11-28 at 08:41 +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > > It seems that I got no responses so far for clarification requests > > > according to the documentation in a direction I hoped for. > > > > That's because you are pretty unresponsive to direction. > > From which places did you get this impression? How many times have I told you to include the reason for your patches in your proposed commit message? Too often. For instance, specific to this patch: Many people do not know that a generic kmalloc does a dump_stack() on OOM. That information should be part of the commit message. Also removing the printk code reduces overall code size. The actual size reduction should be described in the commit message too. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Subject: Re: omapfb/dss: Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation in three functions Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 00:04:04 -0800 Message-ID: <1511856244.19952.14.camel@perches.com> References: <1511809633.32426.70.camel@perches.com> <1511833514.32426.86.camel@perches.com> <7e7e64cf-dbe5-614a-f1e5-29d7b6cf9297@users.sourceforge.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <7e7e64cf-dbe5-614a-f1e5-29d7b6cf9297@users.sourceforge.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: SF Markus Elfring , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: "Andrew F. Davis" , Arvind Yadav , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Tomi Valkeinen , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2017-11-28 at 08:41 +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > > It seems that I got no responses so far for clarification requests > > > according to the documentation in a direction I hoped for. > > > > That's because you are pretty unresponsive to direction. > > From which places did you get this impression? How many times have I told you to include the reason for your patches in your proposed commit message? Too often. For instance, specific to this patch: Many people do not know that a generic kmalloc does a dump_stack() on OOM. That information should be part of the commit message. Also removing the printk code reduces overall code size. The actual size reduction should be described in the commit message too.