linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] perf: fix common misspellings

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:	Tue, 22 Mar 2011 08:27:50 -0300
From:	Lucas De Marchi <lucas.de.marchi@...il.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@...fusion.mobi>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, trivial@...nel.org,
	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	jason.wessel@...driver.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] perf: fix common misspellings

Hi Ingo,

[ CC'ing Randy Dunlap and Jason Wessel ]

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 07:37, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> * Lucas De Marchi <lucas.de.marchi@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> They were generated by 'codespell' and then manually reviewed.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@...fusion.mobi>
>> ---
>>  arch/mips/kernel/perf_event_mipsxx.c |    2 +-
>>  arch/powerpc/kernel/perf_event.c     |    2 +-
>>  arch/sparc/kernel/perf_event.c       |    2 +-
>>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c     |    2 +-
>>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_p4.c  |    8 ++++----
>>  include/linux/perf_event.h           |    2 +-
>>  tools/perf/util/string.c             |    2 +-
>>  7 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> Hm, half of these do not apply anymore.
>
> Since they are auto-generated, mind sending one large spelling fixes patch to
> Linus (for the whole kernel), at the end of the merge window, instead of these
> zillions of small commits which just clutter the patchflow? That makes it a
> heck of a lot easier to verify and handle for everyone involved.

I agree with you, but last time I tried a large patch for fixing this
I've been told to split the patches for each maintainer
(http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-kernel/2010/9/7/4616618). As
you noticed it's a pain to apply them and it's even more for splitting
in a per maintainer basis since it touches a lot of files.

Randy, Jason: as you see maybe the split approach was not a good one.

I'am all for applying this once, as Ingo said.



regards,

Lucas De Marchi
--
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/