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=-5.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham 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 90D0FC2BA19 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:40:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C622206C3 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:40:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="hoYqHkBl" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727007AbgDFKkk (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Apr 2020 06:40:40 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-f68.google.com ([209.85.166.68]:34153 "EHLO mail-io1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726883AbgDFKkk (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Apr 2020 06:40:40 -0400 Received: by mail-io1-f68.google.com with SMTP id f3so5162079ioj.1 for ; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 03:40:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=+wHLle163nkPCKxLaEKL4MOVhBjBpBTiH90GC4QUefI=; b=hoYqHkBlAP3yzC6Ax41RDOjWG6bKsaXL4GZTad8hAvcE4NPCiWL49B6lzU4RIygC3c hO4AqNj/LR0OqrLfNL1lDb8ANa31FsuCaBSrfSxkxDV4cXX9DHTvOTAqqgVD7e7g7W6r MR9LS0yjNYjXCM3oHHLYK7OYdIHt6Be6gTjJUI6GzpTLalpnV2Vfhhujc3aFI0k6ql/N D0CtjAPulIY11QdXBktliVIrbQ7oaBT5YJ4gl7DjmsQ49PBZp8Uas6U7spvC5sobzN+n b2Mq4OUTj2RZ6yLKqVMCiuXnp1qPvP2wp2LdpiQ1EEmTBlfzwkLkdn577I7UAvB0Bw25 g0yQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=+wHLle163nkPCKxLaEKL4MOVhBjBpBTiH90GC4QUefI=; b=MsBrR4kLxnL+PRF7ig8xQ6Dv0B/bBFlEq8Nob9ekXlZgjCdAjKTj1iqwWDh7ct/Iyd LMI710/oNvyC4cN6VCq8LfouW77Zt0pQaMFhNwczroFbkCK5kwC6jQB9PwqrBObcsW4W CNxunIOl6w32pMnSf/yTU0K7WSY+FSzXdkLnboYw+E46k4ymK0yn/pO5in8/RSA5noTH n4ySXFmPa0VfxydglVf7IRY3QPSFS4ykkfEGyHx1qNE7CT2ioKKGE29aRmJbk/8wZWqI nWXiu6NHy1Ux7O2nZpdYLgBkSvlKpHwEiVAin8TyETqlJTJW91W6SiElwH2NugzBtAXn pc/A== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuYS+zBttkt6S86MwnPqqTM0z3GB56PMHU/i4PhuOyAmqcm/4SZP pT28bbMlAQSp9hvgHONQvAYmjZp0kFrbqE5t7hU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypK+D0ZxNWKyr83bCZwm/3YZVNeBMXaEj+jDxkqWJWTDse5JQhfSnegHQy/MNeoNr/GFyb1ec4efKkthPaHSlho= X-Received: by 2002:a02:a49a:: with SMTP id d26mr19822230jam.117.1586169639420; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 03:40:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Qiujun Huang Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2020 18:40:25 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc/powernv: add NULL check after kzalloc in opal_add_one_export To: Markus Elfring Cc: "Oliver O'Halloran" , linuxppc-dev , LKML , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Michael Ellerman , Paul Mackerras , Thomas Gleixner Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 6:02 PM Markus Elfring wrote= : > > >>>> Here needs a NULL check. > >> quite obvious? > > I suggest to consider another fine-tuning for the wording also around > such =E2=80=9Cobvious=E2=80=9D programming items. > > > >>> I find this change description questionable > >>> (despite of a reasonable patch subject). > > I got further development concerns. > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/D= ocumentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=3Da10c9c710f9ecea87b9f4bbb83= 7467893b4bef01#n129 > > * Were changes mixed for different issues according to the diff code? > > * I find it safer here to split specific changes into separate update ste= ps > for a small patch series. > > * Will the addition of the desired null pointer check qualify for > the specification of the tag =E2=80=9CFixes=E2=80=9D? > > > >>> Will a patch change log be helpful here? > >> I realized I should write some change log, and the change log was mean= ingless. > > Will any more adjustments happen for the discussed update suggestion > after the third patch version? > > > > The changelog is fine IMO. The point of a changelog is to tell a > > reader doing git archeology why a change happened and this is > > sufficent for that. > > We might stumble on a different understanding for the affected =E2=80=9Cc= hange logs=E2=80=9D. > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/D= ocumentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=3Da10c9c710f9ecea87b9f4bbb83= 7467893b4bef01#n751 > > Would you like to follow the patch evolution a bit easier? > > Regards, > Markus Thanks for the reply. I should study the documentation first. BTW, happy new week