| 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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 05:30:37 -0700 (PDT) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: jirislaby@...il.com Cc: viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, joe@...ches.com, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 109/148] include/asm-x86/serial.h: checkpatch cleanups - formatting only From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com> Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 13:24:23 +0100 > On 03/23/2008 01:19 PM, David Miller wrote: > > There are mountains of more useful stuff to be working on (much of it > > automated, but unlike checkpatch work doesn't result in crap) rather > > than 148 patches of checkpatch vomit. > > > > Fixing sparse warnings properly fixes real issues, whereas fixing > > checkpatch stuff creates garbage 9 times out of 10. > > Yes, I agree with you in this. > > What I don't agree with is that it's useless. It may help track down some issues > in yet prepared patch (it's checkpatch, not checkcode and it should be used in > that manner). I strongly disagree still. Half the warnings I get when I have run checkpatch on things I've written were crap. It's an automaton, and that's why people like it. It tells you exactly what to do, and people like to be able to turn their brains off like that. -- 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