linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0947/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 2 Aug 2016 08:00:54 -0700
From:	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To:	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <maurochehab@...il.com>,
	Baole Ni <baolex.ni@...el.com>
Cc:	devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, k.kozlowski@...sung.com,
	mchehab@...hat.com, arnd@...db.de, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
	linux-media@...r.kernel.org, mchehab@...radead.org,
	hverkuil@...all.nl, kyungmin.park@...sung.com,
	m.szyprowski@...sung.com, chuansheng.liu@...el.com,
	mchehab@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	m.chehab@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0947/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro

On 08/02/16 05:51, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Tue,  2 Aug 2016 20:01:34 +0800
> Baole Ni <baolex.ni@...el.com> escreveu:
> 
>> I find that the developers often just specified the numeric value
>> when calling a macro which is defined with a parameter for access permission.
>> As we know, these numeric value for access permission have had the corresponding macro,
>> and that using macro can improve the robustness and readability of the code,
>> thus, I suggest replacing the numeric parameter with the macro.
> 
> Gah!
> 
> A patch series with 1285 patches with identical subject!
> 
> Please don't ever do something like that. My inbox is not trash!
> 
> Instead, please group the changes per subsystem, and use different
> names for each patch. Makes easier for people to review.
> 
> also, you need to send the patches to the subsystem mainatiner, and
> not adding a random list of people like this:
> 
> To: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, maurochehab@...il.com, mchehab@...radead.org, mchehab@...hat.com, m.chehab@...sung.com, m.szyprowski@...sung.com, kyungmin.park@...sung.com, k.kozlowski@...sung.com
> 
> Btw, use *just* the more recent email of the maintainer, instead of
> spamming trash to all our emails (even to the ones that we don't use
> anymore!
> 
> I'll just send all those things to /dev/null until you fix your
> email sending process.
>
+1285

There are people at Intel who know about things like this.

-- 
~Randy