Re: [PATCH] Remove obsolete CLOCK_TICK_ADJUST

Andrew Morton
2008-02-29T22:39:29Z

On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 23:27:01 +0100 (CET)
Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 29 Feb 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > The changelog provides no reason for the revert of those two patches.
> >
> > Look at it from the point of view of a person who hasn't been following the
> > discussion (whose initials might be LT). That person might get puzzled and
> > upset, no?
>
> I'm puzzled at how to explain this...

Please try.

> The whole details have been explained over and over during the discussion.

That's no use to someone who is trying to understand this patch.

> The simple answer is that CLOCK_TICK_ADJUST has been causing extra clock
> drift, John's attempt didn't fix the real cause.
> My patch doesn't just revert the patches, it also includes the _real_ fix,
> so why would the real fix require more justification? That person also
> didn't get puzzled why two patches claiming to fix the same problem got
> merged...

A revert patch's changelog should explain why the code is being reverted.
ie: what was wrong with it.

A bugfix patch's changelog should explain the problem which is being
solved, and how it solves it.

Look at it from the point of view of someone who isn't intimately involved
in that subsystem and who isn't following every email on whatever mailing
list. Your changelog des not provide sufficient detail for such a person
to understand your patch.