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  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:	Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:36:42 +0100
From:	Jean Delvare <>
To:	Andi Kleen <>
Cc:	Joe Perches <>, Andy Whitcroft <>,
	LKML <>
Subject: Re: checkpatch on Kconfig files

Hi Andi,

On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:21:21 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > I believe that was Andi Kleen's pet peeve,
> > so I'll punt it back to him.
> This was always in checkpatch. If you touch/move some existing
> code it blames you for the issues that were already there.
> Not specific to this check.

Actually it is. I was not moving the Kconfig entry, and I was not
touching its help text either. Here checkpatch complained about
something which was in the context of the patch, not in added or
modified lines. I am not aware of any other check doing that,

If I obeyed to checkpatch and "fixed" the help text to make it happy,
the reviewer would have (rightfully) rejected my patch as mixing
unrelated changes together.

> If you disagree with the warnings just ignore them.

This is a false positive, and checkpatch explicitly asks for these to
be reported. Which is what I'm doing. Better tools make future
contributions better and easier.

Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists