From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.web.de (mout.web.de [217.72.192.78]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3yHKsy3PDjzDrJm for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 05:12:53 +1100 (AEDT) Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re:_char/tpm:_Delete_an_error_message_for_a_failed_memory?= =?UTF-8?B?IGFsbG9jYXRpb24gaW4gdHBtX+KApigp?= To: Jerry Snitselaar , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org 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> <20171018175412.mlj2yvyjmvmfdxzd@rhwork> Cc: Mimi Zohar , Julia Lawall , Alexander Steffen , Andy Shevchenko , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Corentin Labbe , Jason Gunthorpe , Kenneth Goldman , Michael Ellerman , Nayna Jain , Paul Mackerras , =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_H=c3=bcwe?= , Stefan Berger , Jarkko Sakkinen , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org From: SF Markus Elfring Message-ID: <61fa394e-05d1-5081-f8bb-3e7dcbd6ccf9@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 20:11:28 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171018175412.mlj2yvyjmvmfdxzd@rhwork> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , >> Why did you not reply directly with this request for the update steps >> with the subject “Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation >> in tpm_…()”? >> >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10009405/ >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10009415/ >> >> I find that there can be difficulty to show an appropriate information >> source for the reasonable explanation of this change pattern. >> > > Shouldn't this information source for the explanation be the submitter? I offered a bit of information. I agree that it could become better eventually. > I'd hope they understand what it is they are submitting. I do this to some degree. ;-) But I would appreciate if I could refer to a single Linux document for this change pattern around questionable error messages. Would a corresponding link for an accepted explanation in the documentation be nice in this case? Regards, Markus