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  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:   Fri, 12 May 2017 16:37:23 +0800 (SGT)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
cc:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
        Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, devel@...uxdriverproject.org
Subject: Re: Clarification for general change acceptance

> But I will come along source code places where I am going to update details
> which are also trivial.

When you make a patch, you are not obliged to eliminate all of the other
checkpatch warnings on the file.  I don't know where you got this idea
from.  The submitting patch guidelines don't say to do it, and no one else
does it.  You just need to ensure that your changes don't introduce new
warnings, unless there is a good reason to do so.

julia

Powered by blists - more mailing lists