On Thu, 2017-10-19 at 13:35 +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > > > > Omit an extra message for a memory allocation failure in this > > > > > function. > > > > > > > > > > This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software. [] > > > Do you see any need that I should extend subsequent commit messages > > > for this software transformation pattern? > > > > Add a description of _why_ this is being done. > > > > Something like: > > > > "because there is a dump_stack() done on allocation failures > > without __GFP_JNOWARN" > > How do you think about to convert such a description into a special format > for further reference documentation?
I think it's a bad idea if it's a "special" format. Always write _why_ some code is being changed. People could read the commit descriptions and would not need to take extra time to lookup external references. Maybe add something like "see (commit <foo> or <file>)" for additional details" -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
