linux-kernel - Re: Question about create mode, checkpatch, and MAINTAINERS

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: <1453917782.10099.14.camel@perches.com>
Date:	Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:03:02 -0800
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Jeff Merkey <linux.mdb@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Question about create mode, checkpatch, and MAINTAINERS

On Wed, 2016-01-27 at 10:52 -0700, Jeff Merkey wrote:
> So while putting together a patch series that adds some include files
> in the arch/ I ran across the checkpatch WARNING that says MAINTAINERS
> needs updating for new files with create mode.
> Is the best way to do this to submit MAINTAINERS as a separate patch
> or in its own patch with the series, or can I just send the patch
> series to the current MAINTAINERS of those arches and skip this add
> maintainers and ignore the checkpatch WARNING for this.

You can ignore it.

The checkpatch message is just a prompt.  It asks
"does MAINTAINERS need updating"?  The checkpatch message
is just asking
to consider whether or not MAINTAINERS
needs updating.  MAINTAINERS may
not need updating at all.

> From what I have seen, its not a good idea to ignore anything
> checkpatch reports.

It's always better to ignore mechanized messages from
brainless scripts when you know what you're doing.