linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 5/5] Staging: comedi: Prefer using the BIT macro issue in dmm32at.c

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:	Tue, 7 Jun 2016 15:44:27 +0000
From:	Hartley Sweeten <HartleyS@...ionengravers.com>
To:	Ravishankar Karkala Mallikarjunayya <ravishankarkm32@...il.com>,
	"abbotti@....co.uk" <abbotti@....co.uk>,
	"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:	"devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 5/5] Staging: comedi: Prefer using the BIT macro issue in
 dmm32at.c

On Tuesday, June 07, 2016 4:51 AM, Ravishankar Karkala Mallikarjunayya wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH 5/5] Staging: comedi: Prefer using the BIT macro issue in dmm32at.c

Please don't add random patches to a series. You started this series with 1/4, 2/4,
3/4 and 4/4 then added a 5/5. 

Also, please fix the subject lines to include the driver name. This makes thing
clearer when multiple patches do similar things. The subject lines should look
something like this:

staging: comedi: <driver>: <short description>

> This patch Replace all occurences of (1<<x) by BIT(x) in the file das16.c
> to get rid of checkpatch.pl "CHECK" output "Prefer using the BIT macro"

There is no need to state that this is a patch. That is already known.

Regards,
Hartley