From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Received: from mout.web.de (mout.web.de [212.227.17.12])
 (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 3yHKLF6RljzDrJg
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 04:48:52 +1100 (AEDT)
Subject: Re: char/tpm: Improve a size determination in nine functions
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>,
 linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Julia Lawall
 <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>, Alexander Steffen <Alexander.Steffen@infineon.com>,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
 Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
 Corentin Labbe <clabbe.montjoie@gmail.com>,
 Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com>,
 Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@redhat.com>,
 Kenneth Goldman <kgold@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
 Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>, Nayna Jain
 <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
 =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_H=c3=bcwe?= <PeterHuewe@gmx.de>,
 Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <1508238182.16112.475.camel@linux.intel.com>
 <c8d37c0407a949c1abb35cfd79c17f58@infineon.com>
 <1508244757.4234.60.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1710171456360.5035@hadrien>
 <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>
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Message-ID: <e9638486-7e59-1c5a-87ae-ca0f1fbbd021@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 19:48:06 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20171018171858.3lcfr2kcp53fngwv@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

> For 1/4 and 2/4: explain why the message can be omitted.

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.


> Remove sentence about Coccinelle.

I got the impression that there is a bit of value in such
a kind of attribution.


> That's all.

I assume that there might be also some communication challenges involved.


> 3/4: definitive NAK, too much noise compared to value.

I tried to reduce deviations from the Linux coding style again.
You do not like such an attempt for this software area so far.


> 4/4: this a good commit message.

Why did you not reply directly with this feedback for the update step
“[PATCH 4/4] char/tpm: Less checks in tpm_ibmvtpm_probe() after error detection”?

https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10009429/
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/<09a2c3a1-1b10-507d-a866-258b570f6da1@users.sourceforge.net>


> Requires a Tested-by before can be accepted, which I'm not able to give.

I am curious on how this detail will evolve.

Regards,
Markus