linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/5] acpi: fix trivial warning

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 16 Nov 2009 09:27:25 +0800
From:	Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>
To:	Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@...il.com>
Cc:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
	"Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@...el.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] acpi: fix trivial warning

On Mon, 2009-11-16 at 01:27 +0800, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 7:15 PM, Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-11-13 at 22:28 +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> >> That doesn't seem too positive. Or at least there's no indication that
> >> somebody will pick it up.
> >
> > I'd re-submit with a better description of the patch. You should always
> > try to describe what your doing as accurately as possible so the
> > maintainer doesn't have to work very hard to know what your doing.
> 
> There's nothing to add. It's a patch to cleanup the coding style, that's it.
> 
> > That
> > particular patch just has a one liner description that wasn't very
> > informative .. Either that or re-submit your series without that patch
> > if you don't have confidence in it.
> 
> All of my patches have been picked up, except the ones for ACPI. I
> haven't received a single comment from them, which would explain the
> current state of the code.

Hi, Felipe

All files under linux-2.6/drivers/acpi/acpica and most files under
linux-2.6/include/acpi are ACPICA code, see http://www.acpica.org for
detail.

The ACPICA's coding style is totally different than linux kernel.
For example, a function named AcpiEvaluateObject in ACPICA, but in linux
kernel it is called acpi_evaluate_object.

We have a program "acpisrc" to convert the ACPICA style code to linux
style and then run lindent on the converted code.

You can download the official ACPICA release from
http://www.acpica.org/downloads/ , "acpisrc" is included in it.

It's great that you are contributing to ACPICA code.
All these linuxized ACPICA codes are generated by acpisrc and lindent,
so we'd better not touch those code directly.

Instead, our process is:
1. Write patches for ACPICA code.
2. Send patches to devel.acpica.org, robert.moore@...el.com, ming.m.lin@...el.com
3. I will generate and send the linuxized ACPICA code to Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
4. Len asks Linus to merge the linuxized ACPICA code.

Thanks,
Lin Ming

> 
> If somebody raised the hand and said; I'll merge this, please resend,
> I'd do that, otherwise I think it's a waste of time.
> 

--
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/