lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:14:55 -0800 (PST)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
cc:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>,
	Glenn Streiff <gstreiff@...Effect.com>,
	Faisal Latif <flatif@...Effect.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, general@...ts.openfabrics.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <greg@...ah.com>
Subject: Re: Merging of completely unreviewed drivers



On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> 
> Is it really intended to merge drivers without _any_ kind of review?

I'd really rather have the driver merged, and then *other* people can send 
patches!

The thing is, that's what merging really means - people can work on it 
sanely together. Before it's merged, it's a lot harder for people to work 
on it unless they are really serious about that driver, so before 
merging, the janitorial kind of things seldom happen.

So yes, I really do believe that we should merge drivers in particular a 
lot more aggressively. I'd like to see *testing* feedback, in order to not 
merge drivers that simply don't work well enough, but anything else? I 
suspect other feedback is as likely to cause problems as it is to fix 
things.

> This driver even lacks a basic "please fix the > 250 checkpatch errors" [1]
> and similar low hanging fruits that could easily be spotted and then 
> fixed by the submitter within a short amount of time.

Quite frankly, I've several times been *this* close (holds up fingers so 
you can't even see between them) to just remove checkpatch entirely.

I'm personally of the opinion that a lot of checkpatch "fixes" are 
anything but. That mainly concerns fixing overlong lines (where the 
"fixed" version is usually worse than the original), but it's been true 
for some other warnings too.

		Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ