linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86_64: define all _PAGE_* in terms of _PAGE_BIT

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: <20071205112758.GA6143@elte.hu>
Date:	Wed, 5 Dec 2007 12:27:58 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>
Cc:	tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86_64: define all _PAGE_* in terms of _PAGE_BIT_*


* Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com> wrote:

> > > > please run patches through scripts/checkpatch.pl, it gives:
> > > > 
> > > >   total: 10 errors, 0 warnings, 42 lines checked
> > > > 
> > > > (please send a followup cleanup patch - i picked up your series and this 
> > > > is a minor cleanliness issue)
> > > 
> > > Sorry, forgot to check the patches before submission. Will cleanup and 
> > > resubmit soon.
> > 
> > please if possible send a delta against x86.git, not a replacement 
> > patch. It's easier for the patchflow.
> 
> Not sure I understand you right here. Do you mean a patch on top of my 
> previous patches?

yeah - that's easier to pick up for me (because i've already got your 
series applied), and it's also easier for you as well. It also makes 
sense to generally split style fixes from substantial patches. (in the 
cases where there are pre-existing style problems in the code)

	Ingo
--
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/