linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: improve error message for p1-check

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: <1319747342.7969.15.camel@Joe-Laptop>
Date:	Thu, 27 Oct 2011 13:29:02 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc:	Wolfram Sang <w.sang@...gutronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@....ac.uk>,
	Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: improve error message for p1-check

On Thu, 2011-10-27 at 13:11 -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2011, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > I mean it only makes sense if both prefixes exist (otherwise patch and 
> > > git-apply will assume it's not a -p0 patch).
> > I think we should not care about the prefixes at all,
> > only whether or not the patched file exists.
> Nack,

Hi David.

It might be better if you would submit patches
to checkpatch before you nack others.

How about you track the --- and +++ lines and
submit a suggested patch yourself?

> there's nothing wrong with storing original files that you're 
> modifying in a subdirectory with a name of your choice in the kernel tree.  

Just as there's nothing wrong with storing original
and modified versions of subdirectories too.

> It doesn't imply a -p0 patch unless both prefixes appear and that's the 
> best indication that it appears in both the patch author and patch 
> applier's tree whereas the file being modified is ambiguous.

There's no single perfect test and it's just a silly
warning anyway.

I think the most common case is the direct editing of
a single file and production of a diff to submit as
a patch.
 
$ emacs <file>
# make changes, save original as ~ backup
$ diff -urN <file>~ <file> > ./foo.diff
$ make mrproper; make allyesconfig ; make
# deletes backup files
$ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl foo.diff

I didn't bother even finding out why the message
was emitted for me even though I had a b temp
directory in my tree.  I just ignored it.

cheers, Joe

--
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/