linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] checkpatch: improve handling of revert commits

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 21 Aug 2021 00:12:38 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Denis Efremov <efremov@...ux.com>, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
        Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] checkpatch: improve handling of revert commits

On Sat, 2021-08-21 at 09:47 +0300, Denis Efremov wrote:
> 
> On 8/20/21 1:17 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > 
> > And I'm not sure if this particular ERROR is that useful overall.
> 
> I find it useful to check commit-id and that it matches a title.
> It's easy to make a typo in commit-id and get an invalid one.

That's true, but I meant requiring the sha1 hash to contain both
the word "commit" and use ("title").

Looking at checkpatch's errors produced by this GIT_COMMIT_ID
test makes the required form seem a bit too inflexible to me.

For instance: a sha1 hash may be repeated in a commit message where
the first instance has the correct form but the second use is just
the hash and the warning is still produced.