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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 27 Jan 2016 11:14:20 -0700
From:	Jeff Merkey <linux.mdb@...il.com>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Question about create mode, checkpatch, and MAINTAINERS

On 1/27/16, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> 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.
>
>

Thanks Joe.

:-)

Jeff