lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2024]   [Apr]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH net] net: bcmasp: fix memory leak when bringing down if
From


On 4/17/24 9:52 AM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 4/17/24 09:19, Simon Horman wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 09:46:44PM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
>>>>>> When bringing down the TX rings we flush the rings but forget to
>>>>>> reclaimed the flushed packets. This lead to a memory leak since we
>>>>>> do not free the dma mapped buffers. …
>>>>>
>>>>> I find this change description improvable.
>>>>>
>>>>> * How do you think about to avoid typos?
>>>>>
>>>>> * Would another imperative wording be more desirable?
>>>>
>>>> The change description makes sense to me. Can you be a bit more
>>>> specific as to what isn't clear here?
>>>
>>> Spelling suggestions:
>>> + … forget to reclaim …
>>> + … This leads to …
>>
>> Markus, let's cut to the chase.
>>
>> What portion of your responses of this thread were produced
>> by an LLM or similar technology?
>>
>> The suggestions in your second email are correct.
>> But, ironically, your first response appears to be grammatically
>> incorrect.
>>
>> Specifically:
>>
>> * What does "improvable" mean in this context?
>
> I read it as "improbable", but this patch came out of an actual bug
> report we had internally and code inspection revealed the leaks being
> plugged by this patch.
>
>> * "How do you think about to avoid typos?"
>>    is, in my opinion, grammatically incorrect.
>>    And, FWIW, I see no typos.
>
> There was one, "This lead to a memory leak" -> "This leads to a memory
> leak"
>
>> * "Would another imperative wording be more desirable?"
>>    is, in my opinion, also grammatically incorrect.
>>
>> And yet your comment is ostensibly about grammar.
>> I'm sorry, but this strikes me as absurd.
>
> Yeah, I share that too, if you are to nitpick on every single word
> someone wrote in a commit message, your responses better be squeaky
> clean such that Shakespeare himself would be proud of you.
>
> There is a track record of what people might consider bike shedding,
> others might consider useless, and others might find uber pedantic
> comments from Markus done under his other email address:
> elfring@users.sourceforge.net.
>
> Me personally, I read his comments and apply my own judgement as to
> whether they justify spinning a new patch just to address the feedback
> given. He has not landed on my ignore filter, but of course that can
> change at a moments notice.

I try my best to address feedback. After a bit of thought, I feel the
feedback given was not out of good faith. I would like to keep the patch
as-is unless someone else has feedback. That is if the maintainers are
ok with that.

Thanks,
Justin

[unhandled content-type:application/pkcs7-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2024-05-27 16:43    [W:0.136 / U:0.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site