Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-152222-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2024 12:04:06 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
Cc: Daniel Okazaki <dtokazaki@google.com>, kernel-team@android.com,
	linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] eeprom: at24: fix memory corruption race condition
Message-ID: <2024042055-bucked-dosage-2a8d@gregkh>
References: <20240419191200.219548-1-dtokazaki@google.com>
 <939095cb-b9c0-4214-9429-7b45f9a31f36@web.de>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <939095cb-b9c0-4214-9429-7b45f9a31f36@web.de>

On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 11:11:05AM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > If the eeprom is not accessible, an nvmem device will be registered, the
> > read will fail, and the device will be torn down.
> …
> 
> Can it be nicer to present the introduction for failure conditions as an enumeration?
> 
> 
> > Move the failure point before registering the nvmem device.
> …
> 
> I would interpret the diff data more in the way that a devm_nvmem_register() call
> should be performed a bit later in the implementation of the function “at24_probe”.
> How do you think about to mention the affected function also in the summary phrase?
> 

Hi,

This is the semi-friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman.

Markus, you seem to have sent a nonsensical or otherwise pointless
review comment to a patch submission on a Linux kernel developer mailing
list.  I strongly suggest that you not do this anymore.  Please do not
bother developers who are actively working to produce patches and
features with comments that, in the end, are a waste of time.

Patch submitter, please ignore Markus's suggestion; you do not need to
follow it at all.  The person/bot/AI that sent it is being ignored by
almost all Linux kernel maintainers for having a persistent pattern of
behavior of producing distracting and pointless commentary, and
inability to adapt to feedback.  Please feel free to also ignore emails
from them.

thanks,

greg k-h's patch email bot