Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Fix r3 corruption in h_set_dabr()

From: Paul Mackerras <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 19:23:42 +1000

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 09:42:52AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> 
> 
> Le 12/06/2019 à 09:22, Michael Neuling a écrit :
> >In commit c1fe190c0672 ("powerpc: Add force enable of DAWR on P9
> >option") I screwed up some assembler and corrupted a pointer in
> >r3. This resulted in crashes like the below from Cédric:
> 
> Iaw Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:
> 
> Describe your changes in imperative mood, e.g. "make xyzzy do frotz"
> instead of "[This patch] makes xyzzy do frotz" or "[I] changed xyzzy
> to do frotz", as if you are giving orders to the codebase to change
> its behaviour.
> 
> So you could rephrase as follows for instance:
> 
> Commit XXXX ("") screwed up some assembler ....

That advice in submitting-patches.rst is certainly appropriate when
talking about the actual change that the patch makes.  However, it is
also appropriate to give descriptive background material that helps
the reader to understand why the change is necessary -- in this case,
where and how the bug was introduced.  So I'm going to support Mikey
as regards his first few paragraphs.

I agree that the last paragraph that says "This fixes the bug by ..."
could be reworded as "Fix the bug by ...".

Paul.