From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EB7CC433E0 for ; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 15:45:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69C2964F65 for ; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 15:45:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232613AbhBBPpj (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Feb 2021 10:45:39 -0500 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:60718 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235403AbhBBPo2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Feb 2021 10:44:28 -0500 Received: from zn.tnic (p200300ec2f0e1f00d5f9b577de02d878.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ec:2f0e:1f00:d5f9:b577:de02:d878]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.skyhub.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id EA3431EC051E; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 16:43:41 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1612280622; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=dUZnglEtEStsBqDf7rEFf/OitrOe7r+ty4Ma0CKAJgA=; b=ctW8Nk1p0+P459QZQgKExcGpUmthMapXSIdrXr7Go5bhV3ia4PYzfNCcC2SlCMpULpxm2h jVlEVA/astF/kP3I4ynDAXTwxbMKCtgH3yAvc4HRKXIYATF9r/7wOu3ewyrvsJ3lqPsCCK vh8m1IufHEu0KWDiG++kn74eiQzf1TA= Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 16:43:39 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: Jonathan Corbet Cc: x86-ml , lkml Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation/submitting-patches: Add blurb about backtraces in commit messages Message-ID: <20210202154339.GE18075@zn.tnic> References: <20201217183756.GE23634@zn.tnic> <20201221095425.6da68163@lwn.net> <20201222130555.GA13463@zn.tnic> <20210104161911.38eb3e1e@lwn.net> <20210105104805.GC28649@zn.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210105104805.GC28649@zn.tnic> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 11:48:05AM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 04:19:11PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > So I have some questions, I guess... How often is a backtrace *in a commit > > message* really helpful at all? The value in problem reports is clear, but > > I'm not sure how often having a backtrace in a commit message will really > > help the reader understand why the patch was written. But perhaps I'm > > wrong? > > Does the subthread here with Sean shed some light on the matter or... ? > > > If we do want this advice in our already-too-long submitting-patches > > document, > > Thought the same thing when looking at that doc - it is a *lot* and I > guess we should put only very globally relevant info in there... > > > we should perhaps give some advice as to what is "relevant > > information" and what is not? > > Right, in that subthread, the gist of what we wanna say is to almost > always put the splat in the commit message - except for the example I > gave there and other early boot cases - but leave it to the committer to > do the final decision whether to keep or ditch the splat. > > Something like that. Yah, I know, it is fuzzy :-\ Lemme ping here quick - my TODO list still has it. :-) -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette