Re: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 000000000000000e (reset_prng_context)

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:33:12 +0800 Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 09:25:49PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:07:01 +0800 Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 03:11:10PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Except that such a high density of coding-style errors is an indication
> > > > that the code was not closely and critically reviewed by an experienced
> > > > kernel developer.
> > > > 
> > > > > Every damn single warning in this case is about whitespace or 80 column limit.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Every damn single one!
> > > 
> > > Indeed, I apologise for reviewing the code on a monitor that is wider
> > > than yours.  If only we could make sure that all Linux developers
> > > used smaller monitors then the code quality would surely improve!
> > > 
> > 
> > Remaining within 80 cols is a big deal indeed for those who choose to
> > use, or who are forced to use 80-col displays.  Try resizing to 70 cols
> > for a while, see how you get on.
> 
> Sure, I totally understand the 80-column requirement and support
> it too.
> 
> However, I fail to see how one could draw the conclusion that a
> piece of code that breaks the 80-column rule has not been closely
> or critically reviewed.

I said "indication".  I came to no conclusion.

And I agree with me.  I fail to see how someone who is familiar with
kernel code and who is reviewing a submission could let something like

	for (i=DEFAULT_BLK_SZ-1;i>0;i--) {

pass without comment.

> Excuse me for not focusing on white-space or code-width issues
> when reviewing code.

Please do so?  You hopefully only need to do it once per submitter
and we now have a tool which people can use to aid the process.  It's
hardly a large burden.

btw, I've searched my linux-kernel archives and netdev archives and the
linux-crypto web archives and can find no sign of any submission or
discussion of this patch.  Am I looking in the wrong places?