From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de> To: Bo YU <tsu.yubo@gmail.com>, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@oracle.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch/x86: Check return value from a notify_die() call Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 08:50:59 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <615f79c5-5ca8-9dad-9ef7-85d8513a3e1b@web.de> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAKq8=3LaX0tWs0BfdpCYvKRRz5Cqv4cOXo1wcVvpY72cQA8RGA@mail.gmail.com> >>> This is detected by Coverity scan: #CID: 1464472(CHECKED_RETURN) Can an additional imperative wording be helpful for the change description (besides an adjusted patch subject)? >>> FIXES: c94082656dac7(x86: Use enum instead of literals for trap values) >> >> Is the following tag specification more appropriate? >> >> Fixes: c94082656dac7 ("x86: Use enum instead of literals for trap values") > Your description looks like more appropriate, thank you. Thanks for your positive feedback. > But I want to receive suggestions from other reviewers also. So I will > send V2 patch as your point once got confirmed. Sorry. Should the confirmation be sufficient from the available software documentation? https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=625d3449788f85569096780592549d0340e9c0c7#n183 I am curious if this patch review will clarify more aspects. Regards, Markus
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de> To: Bo YU <tsu.yubo@gmail.com>, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@oracle.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch/x86: Check return value from a notify_die() call Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 06:50:59 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <615f79c5-5ca8-9dad-9ef7-85d8513a3e1b@web.de> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAKq8=3LaX0tWs0BfdpCYvKRRz5Cqv4cOXo1wcVvpY72cQA8RGA@mail.gmail.com> >>> This is detected by Coverity scan: #CID: 1464472(CHECKED_RETURN) Can an additional imperative wording be helpful for the change description (besides an adjusted patch subject)? >>> FIXES: c94082656dac7(x86: Use enum instead of literals for trap values) >> >> Is the following tag specification more appropriate? >> >> Fixes: c94082656dac7 ("x86: Use enum instead of literals for trap values") > Your description looks like more appropriate, thank you. Thanks for your positive feedback. > But I want to receive suggestions from other reviewers also. So I will > send V2 patch as your point once got confirmed. Sorry. Should the confirmation be sufficient from the available software documentation? https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?idb5d3449788f85569096780592549d0340e9c0c7#n183 I am curious if this patch review will clarify more aspects. Regards, Markus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-22 6:52 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-06-21 14:40 [PATCH] arch/x86: Check return value from a notify_die() call Markus Elfring 2020-06-21 14:40 ` Markus Elfring 2020-06-22 0:50 ` Bo YU 2020-06-22 0:50 ` Bo YU 2020-06-22 6:50 ` Markus Elfring [this message] 2020-06-22 6:50 ` Markus Elfring
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=615f79c5-5ca8-9dad-9ef7-85d8513a3e1b@web.de \ --to=markus.elfring@web.de \ --cc=alexandre.chartre@oracle.com \ --cc=bp@alien8.de \ --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \ --cc=hpa@zytor.com \ --cc=jannh@google.com \ --cc=keescook@chromium.org \ --cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=luto@kernel.org \ --cc=mingo@redhat.com \ --cc=peterz@infradead.org \ --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \ --cc=tsu.yubo@gmail.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.