| 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: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 14:04:07 +0200 From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> To: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> Subject: Re: checkpatch as a tool (was Re: [RFC][PATCH] SCHED_EDF scheduling class) On Tue 2009-09-22 17:51:43, Daniel Walker wrote: > On Tue, 2009-09-22 at 21:11 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > Now at patch patches/sched_edf-scheduling-class.patch > > > > Daniel is a kind of self-elected joker-bot on lkml, running checkpatch > > out of .procmailrc and annoying people with trivial comments, > > distracting from the real discussion. Raistlin, feel free to ignore him > > in the future. Good, I was afraid Ingo would actually like that behaviour. > You want to talk about it constructively or not? I'll stop sending those > emails if it's actually negative , but I don't think it is.. Getting you 'have misplaced parenthesis' feedback on a bugfix, on a file thatt has 1001 checkpatch problems, and when the patch does not actually introduce the problem... certainly is unwelcome. What about simply avoiding the mails when the file being changed already has checkpatch problems? Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- 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