Re: char/tpm: Improve a size determination in nine functions
From: SF Markus Elfring <hidden>
Date: 2017-10-18 15:22:50
Also in:
kernel-janitors, linux-integrity, lkml
From: SF Markus Elfring <hidden>
Date: 2017-10-18 15:22:50
Also in:
kernel-janitors, linux-integrity, lkml
quoted
Do you find my wording “This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.” insufficient?This is fine for cover letter, not for the commits.
I guess that there are more opinions available by other contributors for this aspect.
After your analysis software finds an issue you should manually analyze what is wrong
This view is generally fine.
and document that to the commit message.
I tried it in a single paragraph so far (besides the reference for the tool).
This applies to sparse, coccinelle or any other tool.
I find that further possibilities can be considered.
Tool-based commit messages are bad for commit history
I disagree to this view.
where as clean description gives idea what was done (if you have to maintain a GIT tree).
How do you think about to offer any wording for an alternative which you would find better?
In my opinion tool is doing all the work but the part that you should do is absent.
Really? Regards, Markus