linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KEYS: Variable type completion

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]

Message-ID: <Yvvef4vCFaYhMjMq@ZenIV>
Date:   Tue, 16 Aug 2022 19:14:23 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Xin Gao <gaoxin@...rlc.com>
Cc:     dhowells@...hat.com, jarkko@...nel.org, jmorris@...ei.org,
        serge@...lyn.com, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KEYS: Variable type completion

On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 02:01:10AM +0800, Xin Gao wrote:
> 'unsigned int' is better than 'unsigned'.

Explain.

You keep sending rather pointless patches with declarative
commit messages instead of explanations.  Why is 'unsigned
int' better than 'unsigned'?  Demonstrate understanding -
simple reference to checkpatch.pl does *NOT* count.