Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 1 May 2023 21:52:20 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To:     Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri@intel.com>,
        "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
        Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
        Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/12] sched: Avoid unnecessary migrations within SMT
 domains
Message-ID: <20230501215220.2591dd22@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <20230502014254.GA1219@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com>
References: <20230406203148.19182-1-ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
        <20230429153219.GC1495785@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
        <20230502014254.GA1219@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 1 May 2023 18:42:55 -0700
Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> I am sorry changelogs are not sufficiently clear. I thought stating the
> overall goal in the cover letter was enough. In the future, would you
> prefer that I repeat the cover letter instead of referring to it? Should
> individual changelogs state the overall goal?

Yes. Every commit should have a change log that explains why that commit
was done without having to look elsewhere.

The cover letter should be the summary of what the patches do. But 5 to 10
years from now, when a git bisect comes across a commit, there's no
guarantee that a cover letter will be easily found. The change log may be
the only thing a developer debugging some code will have to understand what
the change was for.

I'm guilty of having poor change logs which I myself suffered from, as I
don't remember what I meant. So I've been more adamant on adding more
detail to my change logs which has saved me a few times.

-- Steve