linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] checkpatch: test missing initial blank line in block comment

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: <1491560528.3250.20.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Fri, 07 Apr 2017 03:22:08 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Hugues FRUCHET <hugues.fruchet@...com>,
        Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] checkpatch: test missing initial blank line in block
 comment

On Fri, 2017-04-07 at 09:56 +0000, Hugues FRUCHET wrote:
> Hi Joe,

Hi again Hugues.

> here is the output with the last version of the script: 
> https://paste.ubuntu.com/24333124/
> 
> Differences are on the macro cases and the //foo \ *bar, no more warned.

Thanks.

I guess my only real concern about this test is
there are ~15000 instances of this in the tree.

Do maintainers care if comments are formatted

	/*
	 * [multiple...]
	 * line comment
	 */

vs

	/* [multiple...]
	 * line comment
	 */

enough to want others to submit patches
changing from the latter style?

The reason the networking checking exists is
because David Miller, the primary networking
maintainer, was constantly telling others to
resubmit patches to his preferred style.

I doubt there's another maintainer that cares
that much one way or another.

I don't.

Any opinions from anyone else?