Re: Fix quilt merge error in acpi-cpufreq.c

Andrew Morton
2009-04-15T20:37:11Z

On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 12:43:02 -0700 (PDT)
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, 15 Apr 2009, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >
> > "cleanup" is indeed the most common, as it is intended to signify a
> > trivial but nonzero code change. Whether or not it's *correct* is
> > another matter. "build fix" is valid and proper use: it tells that it
> > fixes a compilation error, which succinctly communicates both the
> > priority of the fix and how it needs to be validated.
>
> Why would that be "proper use"?
>
> Dammit, if the "build fix" is not obvious from the rest of the commit
> message, there's something wrong.
>
> And if it _is_ obvious, then the mechanical "Impact:" thing is pointless.
>
> In other words - in neither case does it actually help anything at all.
> It's only distracting noise.
>

I'm getting quite a few Impact:s now and I must say that the Impact:
line is always duplicative of the Subject:. Except in a few cases, and
that's because the Subject: sucked.

But I leave the Impact: lines in there because I'm nice.