linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Staging: rtl8712: rtl871x_ioctl_linux.c Move constant to right side of the comparision

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: <56095513.4090108@lwfinger.net>
Date:	Mon, 28 Sep 2015 09:56:19 -0500
From:	Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
To:	Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
Cc:	Punit Vara <punitvara@...il.com>,
	florian.c.schilhabel@...glemail.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
	devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	dogukan.ergun@...il.com, stillcompiling@...il.com,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Staging: rtl8712: rtl871x_ioctl_linux.c Move constant to
 right side of the comparision

On 09/28/2015 06:18 AM, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 12:45:46PM -0500, Larry Finger wrote:
>> On 09/26/2015 11:49 AM, Punit Vara wrote:
>>> This patch is to the rtl871x_ioctl_linux.c that fixes up following
>>> warning reported by checkpatch.pl :
>>>
>>> - Comparisons should place the constant on the right side of the test
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Punit Vara <punitvara@...il.com>
>>
>> This warning is crap. WTF difference does it make???? The compiler
>> does not care, and any reader with any piece of a brain is not going
>> to be confused!
>>
>> This patch and all others like it are just meaningless source churning!
>>
>> This author has made such a royal mess of his patches that I
>> recommend that ALL of them be dropped. In addition, we should
>> continue to drop his changes until he learns how to use git to
>> generate N/M patches, and until he reads the documentation on patch
>> submission.
> Excuse me for my ignorance, but I still can not see what was wrong with
> his patch. checkpatch is giving warning and he has fixed it. As far as
> sending in series is concerned, he is a newbie and after telling him how
> to generate patches in series he has learnt that. I have already told
> him that his patches might be dropped as they are not in series and he
> is ready to resend in series as soon as Greg confirms that they are
> dropped. And as long as the driver is in staging there will be source
> churning, isn't it?
> If i remember correctly I was told that for a driver to be moved out of
> staging the primary thing is that all checkpatch warnings needs to fixed.
> So if this driver has to move out of staging someday then these warnings
> also has to be fixed by someone.

The primary requirement for moving a driver out of staging is that it use 
mac80211. No amount of cosmetic fixing will ever make that change for rtl8712u!

In my opinion, not ALL checkpatch warnings ever need to be heeded.Can you tell 
me why

/**
  * This is a comment
  */

is superior to

/*
   This is a comment also
  */

The difference is not significant, yet checkpatch treats it as though the source 
was horribly flawed. Similarly, satisfying the 80-character requirement can 
leave the code horribly unreadable.

My main complaint is that the OP submitted dozens of patches with similar 
subjects, yet gave no indication is any of these were resubmissions, and 
completely failed to utilize the patch series mechanism of git. This behavior 
makes life difficult for both the maintainer and the reviewer.

Larry

--
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/