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 A0DAFC433E0 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 10:48:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A8F322515 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 10:48:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729062AbhAEKsu (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jan 2021 05:48:50 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50530 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727764AbhAEKsu (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jan 2021 05:48:50 -0500 Received: from mail.skyhub.de (mail.skyhub.de [IPv6:2a01:4f8:190:11c2::b:1457]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CAAFC061793 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 02:48:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from zn.tnic (p200300ec2f103700ba0c0ccd6fae6c32.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ec:2f10:3700:ba0c:ccd:6fae:6c32]) (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 0397E1EC04CB; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 11:48:06 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1609843687; 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=BiJSPSBYrHbZDXxLcoL/hKKP+MEoHTTHFUnxmu2V1H8=; b=m5BTKc3BRApYJTrb+0gdMU2R1sOHfr5r6vaeJ3UVAyYFV4FdsxvqRPQdy7w/rg0/+KwoM7 Y21FO4xCZD/hHqwIfVNhn/I510VKyHQk9n6D0p0DNaLdEhb6nQFwtuWFgWD3FIAujfqDeo OaPCeempX1eZOacAuYwTpBNHVnUxu/U= Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2021 11:48:05 +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: <20210105104805.GC28649@zn.tnic> References: <20201217183756.GE23634@zn.tnic> <20201221095425.6da68163@lwn.net> <20201222130555.GA13463@zn.tnic> <20210104161911.38eb3e1e@lwn.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210104161911.38eb3e1e@lwn.net> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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 :-\ -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette