linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation: process: Correct numbering

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]

Message-ID: <CAKXUXMwR9i5bJx+_rXkv4SK0yU1cHpGexH9RjsN7UFqJ-Ozsew@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:23:18 +0100
From:   Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     Milan Lakhani <milan.lakhani@...ethink.co.uk>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-safety@...ts.elisa.tech,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@...ethink.co.uk>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation: process: Correct numbering

On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 5:52 PM Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 20:42:36 +0000
> Milan Lakhani <milan.lakhani@...ethink.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Renumber the steps in submit-checklist.rst as some numbers were skipped.
> >
> > Fixes: 72deb455b5ec ("block: remove CONFIG_LBDAF")
> > Signed-off-by: Milan Lakhani <milan.lakhani@...ethink.co.uk>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst | 24 ++++++++++++------------
> >  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst b/Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst
> > index 1879f88..230ee42 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst
> > @@ -75,44 +75,44 @@ and elsewhere regarding submitting Linux kernel patches.
> >  13) Has been build- and runtime tested with and without ``CONFIG_SMP`` and
> >      ``CONFIG_PREEMPT.``
> >
> > -16) All codepaths have been exercised with all lockdep features enabled.
> > +14) All codepaths have been exercised with all lockdep features enabled.
> >
> > -17) All new ``/proc`` entries are documented under ``Documentation/``
> > +15) All new ``/proc`` entries are documented under ``Documentation/``
> [...]
>
> I've applied this, but, if you're going to stick a "Fixes" tag onto a
> patch, it's probably only polite to copy the original author.  I'm not
> fully convinced that the tag is warranted in this case.
>
> This document seems out of date in a number of ways; it could really use a
> rather more thorough updating than this.
>

Jon, I completely agree on your out-of-date comment. That is why we
pointed Milan to that checklist to start with some small basic changes
and continue with increasingly more challenging and complex updates.

Milan, next update for you to consider: what does "make headers_check"
do nowadays? (spoiler alert: it does nothing) Adjust the documentation
for that.

Then, a more general improvement: think about structuring the
checklist to follow the structure of the other submission guidelines.
So, reorder the current checklist and check if the step is mentioned
in submitting-patches and where and make the checklist much more
aligned to submitting-patches.

Lukas