linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Minimize checkpatch induced patches...

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]

Date:   Wed, 14 Sep 2016 12:09:48 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
        Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Minimize checkpatch induced patches...

On Wed, 2016-09-14 at 20:54 +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> On 09/14/2016 08:33 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > That's not true, I _WANT_ checkpatch cleanups for the portion of the
> > kernel I maintain.  It keeps the code correct, up to date, easier to
> > maintain, and in doing so, we have found real bugs over time.
> Assuming that there are others with the same opinions that means that 
> Joes patch is not the right solution?

The patch doesn't forbid that.

It just means any checkpatch induced change outside of
drivers/staging would generally be intentional and would not
commonly be submitted by inexperienced developers.