linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: rtl8712: Removed FSF address warning

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: <56EEB302.3050903@lwfinger.net>
Date:	Sun, 20 Mar 2016 09:26:10 -0500
From:	Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
To:	Parth Sane <laerdevstudios@...il.com>, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc:	florian.c.schilhabel@...glemail.com, amitoj1606@...il.com,
	luisbg@....samsung.com, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: rtl8712: Removed FSF address warning

On 03/20/2016 08:59 AM, Parth Sane wrote:
> Removed checkpatch warning caused by FSF address block
> Signed-off-by: Parth Sane <laerdevstudios@...il.com>
> ---
>   drivers/staging/rtl8712/hal_init.c | 4 ----
>   1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)

Now you have at least 3 different patches all with the same subject! How is the 
maintainer supposed to keep them separate? Patchworks will replace each of them 
with the next one having the same title.

A better way would be to create a multiple-part set of patches with the subject 
containing the name of the file being "fixed".

Note that this warning was added to checkpatch.pl well after the driver was 
added to the staging tree. In fact, if this warning had been present then, the 
FSF address would have been removed.

I consider this type of patch to be of minimal value; however, if you do not 
remove this warning, then someone else will. Thus, you should repackage these 
changes. By my count, there are 94 files containing this information. Dropping 
them as one set of patches might be too many at once. I would split them into 
groups of 13 files in one batch, 14 in the next, then 15, 16, 17, and finally 
19, then each group will also be distinguishable.

If GregKH wants it done differently, he will let us know.

Larry