linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH 0/2] Remove the mistakes detected by the check tools.

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: <CAL=D6xaMAG04tnx_WCbTkcGpyAVBVnz3au1ahDFB72k4DpbKsA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 22 Jan 2016 17:15:04 +0800
From:	Eric Long <eric.long@...aro.org>
To:	Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>,
	Chunyan Zhang <zhang.chunyan@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 0/2] Remove the mistakes detected by the check tools.

On 22 January 2016 at 00:56, Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> Please run checkpath.pl on your patches.  Also if the changes are of a
> different nature, ex. indentation problem and wrong argument to a
> function, please provide two separate patches.
>

Hi Mathieu,

I had already ran checkpath.pl, and there was no error and warning.
All the changes are either indentation problems or wrong argument,
except one static defined problem. So I think there is no need to
separate the patch.
By the way, the patches I had send were created base on the check
tools, one for smatch and another for sparse. In case I need to separate
the patches, do I need to follow the this principle. Thanks.

Best Regards.
Eric