linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 109/148] include/asm-x86/serial.h: checkpatch cleanups

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: <4d8e3fd30803251123t26d562d4v210192bce657ec6a@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:53:15 +0030
From:	"Paolo Ciarrocchi" <paolo.ciarrocchi@...il.com>
To:	"Andi Kleen" <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, jirislaby@...il.com,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, joe@...ches.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 109/148] include/asm-x86/serial.h: checkpatch cleanups - formatting only

On 3/25/08, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
> > > That is an objective (not just random assertation) reason against
> > > doing extensive changes of existing files like Joe's patchkit.
> >
> > Building a single allyesconfig for x86_32 and x86_64 before and after
> > and getting identical binaries is pretty strong.

true, but it's usually simplier to just compile the affected file.

> checkpatch does not necessarily result in the same binaries. First
> there is the build date and then there might be changes like
> KERN_* prefixes added etc.
>
> And there might be code which is not covered under a single configuration,
> e.g. when both 32bit and 64bit x86 is changed.

in the last series of coding style patches i sent to both ingo and
bart i worked as follow:
- worked on files with agreement of the maintainer (or after he asked
me to do the cleanup)
- separated changes that modified the binary from the pure style changes.
-all the patch were compile tested and when possible a size/md5sum
verificatio was performed and added to the changelog.

i learned this "rules" learning from my mistakes and in the end it
worked well so i think the problem is in how people are using the
tool, not in the tool itself.

ciao,
--
Paolo
http://paolo.ciarrocchi.googlepages.com/
--
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/