On 23.09.22 04:26, John Hubbard wrote:
On 9/20/22 05:23, David Hildenbrand wrote:
[1]
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAHk-=wiEAH+ojSpAgx_Ep=nkpwhu8ado3v56bxccsu97oyj...@mail.gmail.com
[2]
https://lore.kernel.org/r/CAHk-=wg40eazofo16eviaj7mfqdhz2gvebvfsmf6gyzsprj...@mail.gmail.com
[2]
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAHk-=wit-dmhmfqery29jspjfgebx_ld+pnerc4j2ag990w...@mail.gmail.com
s/2/3/
Thanks!
...
diff --git a/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
b/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
index 03eb53fd029a..e05899cbfd49 100644
--- a/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
+++ b/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
@@ -1186,6 +1186,67 @@ expression used. For instance:
#endif /* CONFIG_SOMETHING */
+22) Do not crash the kernel
+---------------------------
+
+In general, it is not the kernel developer's decision to crash the kernel.
What do you think of this alternate wording:
In general, the decision to crash the kernel belongs to the user, rather
than to the kernel developer.
Ack
[...]
I like the wording, it feels familiar somehow! :)
:)
Reviewed-by: John Hubbard <jhubb...@nvidia.com>
Thanks!
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
