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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 15:51:37 +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] x86_64: some whitespace cleanups in paging code * Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com> wrote: > This patch does some whitespace cleanups in the paging code to fix > some checkpatch.pl warnings of my formerly merged cleanup patches. thanks, applied. btw., if there's any file you are particularly interested in cleaning up as a whole, you can use the --file option: scripts/checkpatch.pl --file include/asm-x86/pgtable_64.h there's no hard policy on whether cleanups should be done pre-unification or post-unification. I've been using the following pretty sensible 3-step path when doing manual unifications: - clean up the _32 and _64 file first (this is also easy to check - the resulting .o or vmlinux must not differ with/without the patch) - remove artificial differences (in a separate patch) - do the unification (in a third patch) the general rule, more patches are better than fewer patches. Most of our testing/bisetion infrastructure is per-patch/per-commit, so if some mistake happens (and mistakes happen all the time), the finer grained approach is always easier to sort out. 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists