linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/14] efi: Make checkpatch complain less about efi.h GUID additions

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]

Date:	Wed, 3 Feb 2016 11:18:38 +0000
From:	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Jones <pjones@...hat.com>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/14] efi: Make checkpatch complain less about efi.h
 GUID additions

On Wed, 03 Feb, at 11:50:35AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> Hm, so the GUIDs are line-broken in the same fashion in the spec, after the third 
> parameter?
 
Yep, they are.

> That's a strong reason indeed - and then the changelog and title should say that: 
> 're-format GUID tables to follow the format of the UEFI spec'. That it also 
> pacifies checkpatch is a side effect.

I think that's a fair change.

Peter could you take a look at updating the changelog in a v2? If not,
I'll do it.