linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] Add a usbredir kernel module to remotely connect USB devices over IP.

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:	Wed, 8 Jul 2015 09:11:53 +0200
From:	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To:	Jeremy White <jwhite@...eweavers.com>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	spice-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] Add a usbredir kernel module to remotely connect
 USB devices over IP.

Hi,

On 07-07-15 18:47, Jeremy White wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Well, the checkpatch.pl reports were all style (and mostly whitespace);
>>> roughly 3000 of them against 3000 lines of code :-/.  I did review the
>>> code, looking for areas where I thought it would badly cram into the
>>> kernel, and I adjusted the few I found (and sent changes upstream).
>>
>> style matters, as it's a thing with your brain.  You learn patterns and
>> if the patterns change, you have to do more work and don't see the real
>> issues involved.  So by ignoring our style you are saying you don't want
>> anyone else in the kernel community to ever review or work on the code,
>> which isn't ok.
>
> Looks like I can't side step this unless Hans is willing to shift the
> usbredir project entirely to using kernel style :-/.

I'm fine with moving the usbredir project to the kernel style, the question
is how to do this without causing any hidden breakage.

Can you create a gnu-indent invocation which will do most of the work?

And then a hopefully managable sized patch on top to fix the remaining
style errors in usbredirparser ?

> I will plan to make changes so that checkpatch runs clean; I lay out my
> concerns and my plan below to make sure I'm taking the best path.
>
> My main concern with changing the ~2,500 lines of code from the upstream
> usbredir project is that it will increase the odds that I will introduce
> errors, both initially, and again later as I review and attempt to relay
> patches from the upstream.
>
> To summarize the checkpatch reports:  the biggest issue is whitespace,
> which shouldn't be a problem; I should be able to automate that without
> error.  There are also a fair number of one offs; FSF address, space
> after '!', etc.  I hope to persuade Hans to take a few style only
> patches upstream to address those.  That leaves a pack of about 60 brace
> placement and line length issues.
>
> I will plan to manually change those prior to submission.  Any upstream
> changes that affect the same code will be manually corrected as well,
> prior to submission.
>
> Make sense?

Sounds good, note that as said I'm fine with moving over the usbredir(parser)
code to the kernel style, as long as the changes are reviewable.

I think it may be best to only convert the usbredirdparser files, as those
are the only ones you need for the kernel. Having a mixed style in usbredir
is not ideal, but something I can live with.

Regards,

Hans

--
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/