linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 001] staging: wlan-ng: Add tabstop preceding the statement

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, 31 Jan 2017 07:20:27 -0500
From:   Maksymilian Piechota <maksymilianpiechota@...il.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     Maksymilian Piechota <maksymilianpiechota@...il.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 001] staging: wlan-ng: Add tabstop preceding the statement

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 04:07:04AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-01-31 at 06:33 -0500, Maksymilian Piechota wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 03:18:45AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > checkpatch is just a guide, it's brainless.
> > > 
> > > The reason these lines are > 80 columns is
> > > overly long/verbose identifiers.
> > > 
> > > If you really want to clean up the code here,
> > > the P90211ENUM_ prefixes are a bit misleading
> > > as they all are #define and not enums at all.
> > >
> > But would you like me to remove this prefixes for all of the enums from
> > p80211types.h? Are you sure it won't cause any symbol conflicts?
> 
> No, I don't want that, I'd prefer you think about it.
> 
> Also, a useful effort would be to (from the README)
> 
> TODO:
> 	[]
>         - move to use the in-kernel wireless stack
> 
> where most all of the P80211 code would be removed.
> 
> Anyway, sure, use checkpatch as a tool to help when
> learning the process of how to submit patches properly.
> Then move on to more thoroughly understand a block of
> code in the kernel that can be improved with cleaner
> style and logic and bug fixes you could submit.
> 
> That's be much more appreciated than random 80 column
> fixups and strict checkpatch compliance done without
> a thorough understanding of the code.
> 
> In any case, welcome, hope you stick around.

It's clear that there are a lot more usefull patches than 80 column fix,
but as you said, I learn how to submit patches and there is is
constraint to submit only one checkpatch warning fix.

Many thanks for advice how to proceed. I will take a look at it when I
finish Greg's tutorial.

Thank you, I hope to have a significant contribution to Linux Community.