Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 15:35:27 -0700
From: Jonathan Corbet <>
To: Kees Cook <>
Cc: Igor Stoppa <>, Matthew Wilcox
 <>, Randy Dunlap <>, Michal Hocko
 <>, Laura Abbott <>, Jerome Glisse
 <>, Christoph Hellwig <>, Christoph
 Lameter <>, linux-security-module
 <>, Linux-MM <>,
 LKML <>, Kernel Hardening
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] genalloc: track beginning of allocations

On Wed, 21 Feb 2018 14:29:06 -0800
Kees Cook <> wrote:

> >> I wonder if this might be more readable by splitting the kernel-doc
> >> changes from the bitmap changes? I.e. fix all the kernel-doc in one
> >> patch, and in the following, make the bitmap changes. Maybe it's such
> >> a small part that it doesn't matter, though?  
> >
> > I had the same thought, but then I would have made most of the kerneldoc
> > changes to something that would be altered by the following patch,
> > because it would have made little sense to fix only those parts that
> > would have survived.
> >
> > If it is really a problem to keep them together, I could put these
> > changes in a following patch. Would that be ok?  
> Hmmm... I think keeping it as-is would be better than a trailing
> docs-only patch. Maybe Jon has an opinion?

I would be inclined to agree.  Putting docs changes with the associated
code changes helps to document the patch itself, among other things.  I
wouldn't split them up.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.