linux-kernel - Re: avoiding rejects

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]

Message-Id: <200707110003.49287.arnd@arndb.de>
Date:	Wed, 11 Jul 2007 00:03:48 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: avoiding rejects

On Tuesday 10 July 2007, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> 
> > Most of these lists are unordered anyway, so inserting the new item at a
> > randomly-chosen position is a better approach than just appending it.
> 
> Really?
> 
> #includes should be sorted alphabetically
> Lots of other stuff should be sorted numerically/alphabetically
> 

I would also argue that adding in an ordered way is better than
at random positions, that is if the list is ordered to start with.
As long as everyone follows the same order, you will get (desired)
conflicts in case two people try to add the same line, and when
the added lines are different, it's as good as random ordering
to avoid undesired merge conflicts.

	Arnd <><
-
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/