On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 01:21:47PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> Make extlog_print_rcd() log unconditionally to report errors even if
> userspace is not consuming trace events. Remove ras_userspace_consumers()
> because it is not anymore used.
Did you do any git archeology before that?
d6cae935ec5b ("trace, eMCA: Add a knob to adjust where to save event log")
I can't find in this commit message why this is needed... Do share pls.
> This change makes extlog_print() (ELOG) log consistently with ghes_proc()
> (GHES).
Avoid having "This patch" or "This commit" in the commit message. It is
tautologically useless.
Also, do
$ git grep 'This patch' Documentation/process
for more details.
Pls have a look at our documentation and check all your patches.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
On Friday, May 10, 2024 2:52:14 PM GMT+2 Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 01:21:47PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > Make extlog_print_rcd() log unconditionally to report errors even if
> > userspace is not consuming trace events. Remove ras_userspace_consumers()
> > because it is not anymore used.
>
> Did you do any git archeology before that?
>
> d6cae935ec5b ("trace, eMCA: Add a knob to adjust where to save event log")
>
> I can't find in this commit message why this is needed... Do share pls.
>
> > This change makes extlog_print() (ELOG) log consistently with ghes_proc()
> > (GHES).
I thought that ELOG and GHES should be modeled consistently. ghes_proc()
prints to the console while ghes_do_proc() also uses ftrace. I made this short
series an RFC mainly to ask / receive comments on this change (3/3).
If we want to make ELOG and GHES act similarly, this patch is needed.
Otherwise, things should be left the way they currently are.
I'll make a v3 with a more clear explanation of why I think we should prefer
to make ELOG act similarly to GHES in how kernel logs are handled.
> Avoid having "This patch" or "This commit" in the commit message. It is
> tautologically useless.
>
> Also, do
>
> $ git grep 'This patch' Documentation/process
>
> for more details.
>
> Pls have a look at our documentation and check all your patches.
>
> Thx.
Please note that I was introducing the "why" part of the message. I never
refer to this patch for the "what", and I always use an imperative tone only
in the "what" part.
However, I see why this commit message was poor. And probably also the other
two were low quality. Therefore, I'll rework this and also the other two
messages.
Thanks for your comments,
Fabio