Re: [PATCH 17/17] xen: disable MSI
From: Jeff Garzik
Date: Thu May 28 2009 - 15:52:26 EST
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Wed, 27 May 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
hm, i have to concur. Too often it ends up splitting attention away
from the title of the commit. I do reject (or fix up) bad impact
lines - will stop doing them altogether if you think there's a net
downside to them ...
I actually think that if there is a good reason for them, they can stay.
Just don't make it one of those "every commit that goes through me has to
Pu another way: if they actually add value in highlighting the commits
that _should_ stand out, then hey, by all means, keep such ones. I would
not at all object if it was an issue of
[ Impact: fix bugzilla entry 455123 ]
[ Impact: fix user-triggerable oops ]
Ideally "Impact" is pointless if you are otherwise writing a clear,
concise commit description. "Fixes user-triggerable oops" on a line by
itself is clear enough, and is how I've been writing descriptions for a
People with the urge to add "Impact:" to every commit wind up either
being redundant, or for small patches, having the entire ex-Subject
commit description be "Impact: blah blah blah"
If IOW, if the impact is not already clear, you're doing something
wrong, and "Impact" is not necessarily going to fix that.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/