linux-kernel - Re: powerpc/fadump: trivial fix of spelling mistake, clean up message

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: <1467027183.1847.98.camel@perches.com>
Date:	Mon, 27 Jun 2016 04:33:03 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
	Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Jiri Kosina <trivial@...nel.org>,
	Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: powerpc/fadump: trivial fix of spelling mistake, clean up
 message

On Mon, 2016-06-27 at 21:20 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-06-27 at 03:51 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > 
> > On Mon, 2016-06-27 at 11:38 +0100, Colin Ian King wrote:
> > > 
> > > On 26/06/16 05:19, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Fri, 2016-24-06 at 17:43:00 UTC, Colin King wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > trivial fix to spelling mistake "rgistration" and minor clean up
> > > > > of the printk error message
> > > > Can you also:
> > > >  - use pr_err()
> > > >  - unsplit the message, ie. keep the string all on one line.
> > > I can unsplit the string, but checkpatch will complain about that, so
> > > I'm not sure if that's preferred or not.
> > > 
> > > WARNING: line over 80 characters
> > If the statement is wrapped after the format,
> > then checkpatch shouldn't complain.
> > 
> > 	pr_err("Failed to invalidate firmware-assisted dump registration. Unexpected error (%d).\n",
> > 	       rc);
> But that's not actually any more readable, so just ignore checkpatch in this
> case IMHO. It's a guide, not the gospel.

Absolutely.  Ignore checkpatch whenever appropriate.

There are relatively few lines in kernel source that
have printk arguments post format that extend beyond
80 columns though and standardization is also good.

cheers back.