linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: do not try to sanity test cover letters

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: <1330390211.16334.24.camel@joe2Laptop>
Date:	Mon, 27 Feb 2012 16:50:11 -0800
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Cc:	apw@...onical.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: do not try to sanity test cover letters

On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 19:47 -0500, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 7:36 PM, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 19:29 -0500, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> >> One possibly common workflow is this:
> >>
> >>       git format-patch -o mypatches --cover-letter ^start end
> >>       ./scripts/checkpatch.pl mypatches/*
> >
> > I use a script for this and don't put the check
> > in checkpatch but put the check in bash.
> 
> Sure, and I can do the same.  But my question to you is whether
> you think the above is a common workflow, and if the false positives
> that it generates will decrease the number of people likely to make
> using it a part of their routine?

Dunno.  I generally think that tools should report
errors when the input given them is inappropriate.

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/