Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 7 Jul 2009 00:44:13 +0200 (CEST) | From | Thomas Gleixner <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH -tip V2] x86: thread_info.h moving comment to where it should be |
| |
Jaswinder,
On Tue, 7 Jul 2009, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote: > On Mon, 2009-07-06 at 20:54 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Jul 2009, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote: > > > > > > By mistake commit 2052e8d40ad58 moved following comment to wrong place, > > > where it does not make any sense : > > > > Wrong. commit 2052e8d4 had the comments in the right place. commit > > 3351cc03 replaced the two identical INIT_THREAD_INFO macros and did > > not update the comments. > > > > Ahh so you was also part of it, here is updated patch:
if you expect that you earn more trust by such snotty comments, then you are really on the wrong track. To keep the record straight:
_You_ sent a patch with a bogus patch description.
Instead of silently sending a fixed up patch after I pointed out to you that your commit log is incorrect you come back and make pompous comments about who is doing wrong and who has taken part of it.
> [PATCH -tip] x86: thread_info.h moving comment to where it should be > > By mistake commit 3351cc03 forget to move following comment along > with INIT_THREAD_INFO : > > "preempt_count needs to be 1 initially, until the scheduler is functional." > > Moving comment back to right place where preempt_count is setting to 1 > > Also by mistake commit 2052e8d4 forget to fix extra line which is not required. > Removed that extra line.
That changelog is just another proof of your attempts to make a moutain out of a molehill:
It does not matter at all which commit did not move a comment and it does even matter less which commit did not remove or added a blank line. For this patch a commit message consisting of a single subject line:
x86: thread_info.h: move comment and remove stray newline
is sufficient and more useful than your "by mistake ..." fingerpointing.
We care about those details with _real_ code bugs, but not for the sake of pointing at the person who made a mistake. We simply care because we want a reference to the context where and why it happened.
Thanks,
tglx
| |