linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] w1: Remove unneeded header file

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]

Message-Id: <113321467122128@web10m.yandex.ru>
Date:	Tue, 28 Jun 2016 16:55:28 +0300
From:	Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>
To:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Cc:	Amitoj Kaur Chawla <amitoj1606@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] w1: Remove unneeded header file

Hi

28.06.2016, 16:50, "Julia Lawall" <julia.lawall@...6.fr>:
>>  24.06.2016, 09:18, "Amitoj Kaur Chawla" <amitoj1606@...il.com>:
>>  > The Coccinelle semantic patch used to make this change is as follows:
>>  > @ includesmodule @
>>  > @@
>>  >
>>  > #include <linux/module.h>
>>  >
>>  > @ depends on includesmodule @
>>  > @@
>>  >
>>  > - #include <linux/moduleparam.h>
>>  >
>>  > Signed-off-by: Amitoj Kaur Chawla <amitoj1606@...il.com>
>>
>>  Looks good to me, but these @@ are pretty cryptic.
>
> There are two rules. The first checks for an include of module.h. The
> second depends on the success of the first one. It removes and include o
> moduleparam.h.

Ok, I see, it makes much more sense now :)

Thank you for clarification