linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] staging: sm750b: Fix coding style issues in sm750

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:   Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:58:41 -0500
From:   Jeremy Lacomis <j.lacomis@...il.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>,
        Teddy Wang <teddy.wang@...iconmotion.com>,
        linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: sm750b: Fix coding style issues in
 sm750_accel.c

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 02:13:31PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 05:48:11PM -0500, Jeremy Lacomis wrote:
> > This is a patch to sm750_accel.c that fixes 80-character line length
> > warnings found by checkpatch.pl. It also fixes some grammatical errors
> > in comments and moves parameter-specific comments from inline to before
> > the function.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Lacomis <j.lacomis@...il.com>
> > ---
> > Changes in v2:
> > - Change function comments to the kernel-doc format
> > 
> >  drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750_accel.c | 189 ++++++++++++++++++----------------
> >  1 file changed, 103 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750_accel.c b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750_accel.c
> > index 1035e91e7cd3..42cd920111bf 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750_accel.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750_accel.c
> > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> > -// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> 
> Why did you change this line?  That is not correct.

Sorry about this Greg, I wasn't familiar with the format of the license
identifier line, and it seemed inconsistent with the rest of the comments at the
time.

> Only ever do one "logical" thing per patch.  If you have to say "also"
> in a changelog text, that's a huge hint you are doing something wrong.

I'll keep this in mind. I think my natural inclination is to be afraid that the
patches I'm sending in are _too_ trivial and breaking up these things into
several different patches would create more work for the maintainers.

Thanks,
- Jeremy