linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: fixed alignment and comment style

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:   Sun, 09 Jul 2017 10:58:31 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Philipp Guendisch <philipp.guendisch@....de>, mchehab@...nel.org
Cc:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, alan@...ux.intel.com,
        jeremy.lefaure@....epita.fr, fabf@...net.be, rvarsha016@...il.com,
        chris.baller@....de, robsonde@...il.com,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...cs.fau.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: fixed alignment and comment style

On Sun, 2017-07-09 at 19:39 +0200, Philipp Guendisch wrote:
> This patch fixed alignment, comment style and one appearance of
> misordered constant in an if comparison.
> Semantic should not be affected by this patch.

Your email subject is wrong.  This is not a checkpatch patch.

Your subject line should be something like:

[PATCH] staging: atomisp2: hmm: Alignment code to open parenthesis

And it's probably more likely to be applied if you separate out
the two different types of changes you are making into 2 patches.