Borislav Petkov writes:
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 11:48:05AM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> Lemme ping here quick - my TODO list still has it. :-)
Yeah, it's been languishing on mine as well. Nobody seems to have any
objections, so I applied it, sorry for sitting on it for so long.
Thanks,
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
> >
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
>
[Digging out from under the pile of mail...]
> From: Borislav Petkov
> Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:58:22 +0100
>
> Document that backtraces in commit messages should be trimmed down to
> the useful information only.
>
> This has been carved out from a tip subsystem handbook patchset by
> Thomas
On Mon, Dec 28, 2020, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 09:59:48AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > Obvious and superfluous for people that are intimately familiar with the
> > code,
> > but explicit call stacks are extremely helpful when (re)learning code.
>
> Here's an
On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 09:59:48AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Obvious and superfluous for people that are intimately familiar with the code,
> but explicit call stacks are extremely helpful when (re)learning code.
Here's an example:
[2.649874] x86/mm: Checked W+X mappings: passed,
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 10:59:22AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 22, 2020, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > +Backtraces help document the call chain leading to a problem. However,
> > > +not all backtraces are helpful. For example,
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 10:59:22AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > Ok, here's the next one which I think, is also, not really controversial.
>
> Heh, are you trying to jinx yourself?
I was trying to conjure up some bikeshedding... and there it
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> Ok, here's the next one which I think, is also, not really controversial.
Heh, are you trying to jinx yourself?
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> index
On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 09:54:25AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Given that there was indeed a lack of bikeshedding, I just went ahead
> and applied this to docs-next; will ship it Linusward in the near
> future.
Cool.
Although I betcha that is because of the impending holiday season. I
think
10 matches
Mail list logo
