Re: [PATCH Part1 v5 23/38] x86/head/64: set up a startup %gs for stack protector

[Michael Roth]

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 10:03:12AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 08:38:31AM -0500, Michael Roth wrote:
> > I've been periodically revising/rewording my comments since I saw you're
> > original comments to Brijesh a few versions back, but it's how I normally
> > talk when discussing code with people so it keeps managing to sneak back in.
> 
> Oh sure, happens to me too and I know it is hard to keep out but when
> you start doing git archeology and start going through old commit
> messages, wondering why stuff was done the way it is sitting there,
> you'd be very grateful if someone actually took the time to write up the
> "why" properly. Why was it done this way, what the constraints were,
> yadda yadda.
> 
> And when you see a "we" there, you sometimes wonder, who's "we"? Was it
> the party who submitted the code, was it the person who's submitting the
> code but talking with the generic voice of a programmer who means "we"
> the community writing the kernel, etc.
> 
> So yes, it is ambiguous and it probably wasn't a big deal at all when
> the people writing the kernel all knew each other back then but that
> long ain't the case anymore. So we (see, snuck in on me too :)) ... so
> maintainers need to pay attention to those things now too.
> 
> Oh look, the last "we" above meant "maintainers".
> 
> I believe that should explain with a greater detail what I mean.
> 
> :-)

Thanks for the explanation, makes perfect sense. Just need to get my brain
on the same page. :)