linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] staging: kpc2000: remove unnecessary comments in kp2000_pcie

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, 12 Jun 2019 12:07:49 +0200
From:   Simon Sandström <simon@...anor.nu>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] staging: kpc2000: remove unnecessary comments in
 kp2000_pcie_probe

On 12/06, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 10:39:36AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 10:05:35PM +0200, Simon Sandström wrote:
> > > @@ -349,9 +340,7 @@ static int kp2000_pcie_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> > >  		goto err_remove_ida;
> > >  	}
> > >  
> > > -	/*
> > > -	 * Step 4: Setup the Register BAR
> > > -	 */
> > > +	// Setup the Register BAR
> > 
> > Greg, are we moving the C++ style comments?  Linus is fine with them.  I
> > don't like them but whatever...
> 
> I don't like them either.  I'm only "ok" with them on the very first
> line of the file.  Linus chose // to make it "stand out" from the normal
> flow of the file, which is fine for an SPDX line.  So putting these in
> here like this is not ok to me.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

I changed them to C++ style so that they would match the other comments
in the file, which are C++ style, but I guess that it should have been
done the other way around with the C++ style changed to C style.

Good to know. I'll change them back and send a v2.

- Simon