From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751771AbdK1Itu (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 28 Nov 2017 03:49:50 -0500
Received: from eddie.linux-mips.org ([148.251.95.138]:48488 "EHLO
        cvs.linux-mips.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751385AbdK1Itt (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 28 Nov 2017 03:49:49 -0500
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 09:49:45 +0100
From: Ladislav Michl <ladis@linux-mips.org>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>,
        linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, "Andrew F. Davis" <afd@ti.com>,
        Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@gmail.com>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>,
        Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: omapfb/dss: Delete an error message for a failed memory
 allocation in three functions
Message-ID: <20171128084945.GA29091@lenoch>
References: <c48a01db-c477-3bd3-5cb4-548e47810ccb@users.sourceforge.net>
 <d29a0bae-7b6f-b8f6-6809-5a097cd5a26a@ti.com>
 <1511809633.32426.70.camel@perches.com>
 <d82fbab2-865f-3051-f487-d310ee819cf3@users.sourceforge.net>
 <1511833514.32426.86.camel@perches.com>
 <7e7e64cf-dbe5-614a-f1e5-29d7b6cf9297@users.sourceforge.net>
 <1511856244.19952.14.camel@perches.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1511856244.19952.14.camel@perches.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:04:04AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-11-28 at 08:41 +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > > > It seems that I got no responses so far for clarification requests
> > > > according to the documentation in a direction I hoped for.
> > > 
> > > That's because you are pretty unresponsive to direction.
> > 
> > From which places did you get this impression?
> 
> How many times have I told you to include the reason for
> your patches in
> your proposed commit message?  Too often.
> 
> For instance, specific to this patch:
> 
> Many people do not know that a generic kmalloc does a
> dump_stack() on OOM.  That information should be part
> of the commit message.
> 
> Also removing the printk code reduces overall code size.
> The actual size reduction should be described in the
> commit message too.

Could we, please, return one step back and reevaluate need for
kmalloc. That would eliminate original "problem" as well.

	ladis