linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: greybus: use inline function for macros

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]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2303200659280.2940@hadrien>
Date:   Mon, 20 Mar 2023 07:00:48 +0100 (CET)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>
To:     Menna Mahmoud <eng.mennamahmoud.mm@...il.com>
cc:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, outreachy@...ts.linux.dev,
        johan@...nel.org, elder@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: greybus: use inline function for macros

> > > and version that I have submitted, should I do anything about it as you
> > > said
> > > it is wrong solution?
> > My concern was the blank line after each of the structure definitions,
> > which is not in Greg's tree, so he can't apply the patch.  Other than
> > that, if the code compiles it is at least going in the right direction.
> >
> > Please fix the newlines issue, and then send the patch again.
> >
> > julia
>
>
> Okay I will fix it, but will send it as a new patch not v3, right?

Why as a new patch?  The change is the same as in v2, and sending v3 makes
it clear that v2 should be ignored.

julia