From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3yHJlc1BVPzDrJT for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 04:22:19 +1100 (AEDT) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 20:22:09 +0300 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: SF Markus Elfring Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Mimi Zohar , Julia Lawall , Alexander Steffen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Andy Shevchenko , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Corentin Labbe , Jason Gunthorpe , Jerry Snitselaar , Kenneth Goldman , Michael Ellerman , Nayna Jain , Paul Mackerras , Peter =?iso-8859-1?Q?H=FCwe?= , Stefan Berger Subject: Re: char/tpm: Improve a size determination in nine functions Message-ID: <20171018172209.dn3jwl3juzsvkn7c@linux.intel.com> References: <1508244757.4234.60.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1508253453.4234.81.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <9689f036-ba9f-d23b-cf89-c289bc308771@users.sourceforge.net> <20171018145735.lpzwakatsty7emlw@linux.intel.com> <351cf78a-14f6-c6e7-2902-048e7dc57a14@users.sourceforge.net> <20171018155946.e7ga7jyex6eia252@linux.intel.com> <55d76224-3019-6614-70ce-ba260bbcd54f@users.sourceforge.net> <20171018171858.3lcfr2kcp53fngwv@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 In-Reply-To: <20171018171858.3lcfr2kcp53fngwv@linux.intel.com> List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 08:18:58PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 06:43:10PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > > Commit message should just describe in plain text what you are doing > > > > Did other contributors find the wording “Replace …” > > > > > > > and why. > > > > and “… a bit safer according to the Linux coding style convention.” > > sufficient often enough already? > > > > Which description would you find more appropriate for this change pattern? > > > > Regards, > > Markus > > For 1/4 and 2/4: explain why the message can be omitted. Remove sentence > about Coccinelle. That's all. > 3/4: definitive NAK, too much noise compared to value. > 4/4: this a good commit message. Requires a Tested-by before can be > accepted, which I'm not able to give. > > Hope this helps. > > /Jarkko One more word of advice: send the three as separate patches. My guess is that it takes a factor longer time to apply 4/4 than other patches because there's more limited crowd who can test it.