[PATCH] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Fix r3 corruption in h_set_dabr()

Christophe Leroy christophe.leroy at c-s.fr
Wed Jun 12 19:28:20 AEST 2019



Le 12/06/2019 à 11:23, Paul Mackerras a écrit :
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 09:42:52AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>
>>
>> Le 12/06/2019 à 09:22, Michael Neuling a écrit :
>>> In commit c1fe190c0672 ("powerpc: Add force enable of DAWR on P9
>>> option") I screwed up some assembler and corrupted a pointer in
>>> r3. This resulted in crashes like the below from Cédric:
>>
>> Iaw Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:
>>
>> Describe your changes in imperative mood, e.g. "make xyzzy do frotz"
>> instead of "[This patch] makes xyzzy do frotz" or "[I] changed xyzzy
>> to do frotz", as if you are giving orders to the codebase to change
>> its behaviour.
>>
>> So you could rephrase as follows for instance:
>>
>> Commit XXXX ("") screwed up some assembler ....
> 
> That advice in submitting-patches.rst is certainly appropriate when
> talking about the actual change that the patch makes.  However, it is
> also appropriate to give descriptive background material that helps
> the reader to understand why the change is necessary -- in this case,
> where and how the bug was introduced.  So I'm going to support Mikey
> as regards his first few paragraphs.

Does it really matter knowing that it is Mikey who screwed up the 
assembler ? For me what's important is to know which commit introduced 
the error, not who made the error, isn't it ?

Christophe

> 
> I agree that the last paragraph that says "This fixes the bug by ..."
> could be reworded as "Fix the bug by ...".
> 
> Paul.
> 


More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list