On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 at 08:19, Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com wrote:
Am 23.03.22 um 09:10 schrieb Paul Menzel:
Sorry, I disagree. The motivation needs to be part of the commit message. For example see recent discussion on the LWN article *Donenfeld: Random number generator enhancements for Linux 5.17 and 5.18* [1].
How much the commit message should be extended, I do not know, but the current state is insufficient (too terse).
Well the key point is it's not about you to judge that.
If you want to complain about the commit message then come to me with that and don't request information which isn't supposed to be publicly available.
So to make it clear: The information is intentionally hold back and not made public.
In that case, the code isn't suitable to be merged into upstream trees; it can be resubmitted when it can be explained.
Cheers, Daniel