Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2018 16:46:13 -0400 From: Stephen Kiernan <hackagadget@gmail.com> To: cem@freebsd.org Cc: "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Veriexec Message-ID: <CAEm%2B2uVQ_OM=neP5FRW7SW_7b15Mu%2BZK=ji5s1484SApKnpv%2Bg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAG6CVpWON-F3T%2Bqs0y71LbeDWjd1tyuhzCg6Jvo93re1RbxmEQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAG6CVpW3xL5pmiU91WgzXKram7ogMYNzBF3a-ggaXjkD3fMbWw@mail.gmail.com> <CAEm%2B2uWJTyF1QyYraGxNS3TpJNPyT0hMnsVAXj%2BUSayH%2BJi4nA@mail.gmail.com> <CAG6CVpV7Cf1DTx0aMoWaisHbrF-J6SbiFuJoJ%2Bj6dKjbEPMQ9A@mail.gmail.com> <CAEm%2B2uVwmM6y5sx9u_MoED%2BWJT_hAs3j-LReWdXQKKcBrO3tfw@mail.gmail.com> <CAG6CVpWON-F3T%2Bqs0y71LbeDWjd1tyuhzCg6Jvo93re1RbxmEQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 4:29 PM, Conrad Meyer <cem@freebsd.org> wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Stephen Kiernan <hackagadget@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 2:06 PM, Conrad Meyer <cem@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> (Additionally, I don't really like the use of > >> "revert" (as used in the commit message) or "backout" (here) to > >> describe the kernel changes. The bad code is still present, but > >> disabled by default.) > > > > What would you prefer? It helps to provide an alternative if you wish t= o > > see someone potentially use it in the future. You simply stated you > didn't > > like the use without providing an alternative. > > It's a minor language quibble =E2=80=94 don't worry about it too much. I > would suggest "disable by default," for example. "Revert" and > "backout" have a specific meaning that is approximately 'svn merge -c > -NNNNNN'. > > > Note that the commit message for r335682 says "Partial revert of > > r335399 and r335400" which is exactly what it is. It wasn't a full reve= rt > > of the commits, it was only partially reverting them. > > It removes 7 lines out of 2856 lines added in the two commits. I > agree that you're technically correct =E2=80=94 it is a partial revert. = But I > think it would be more clear and accurate not to describe it as any > kind of revert, given how little (0.25% of lines) was actually > removed. > Fair enough. Thanks. -Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAEm%2B2uVQ_OM=neP5FRW7SW_7b15Mu%2BZK=ji5s1484SApKnpv%2Bg>