linux-kernel - wireless: cleanup patches

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: <87mst989lj.fsf_-_@kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2024 18:46:32 +0200
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>
To: Michael Büsch <m@...s.ch>
Cc: Yang Li <yang.lee@...ux.alibaba.com>,  Larry.Finger@...inger.net,
  linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,  b43-dev@...ts.infradead.org,
  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,  Abaci Robot <abaci@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: wireless: cleanup patches

Michael Büsch <m@...s.ch> writes:

> On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 09:12:09 +0800
> Yang Li <yang.lee@...ux.alibaba.com> wrote:
>
>> Closes: https://bugzilla.openanolis.cn/show_bug.cgi?id=7783
>
> This link is not publicly accessible.
>
>> a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43legacy/dma.c +++
>> b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43legacy/dma.c @@ -174,8 +174,8 @@
>> static struct b43legacy_dmaring *priority_to_txring( {
>>  	struct b43legacy_dmaring *ring;
>>  
>> -/*FIXME: For now we always run on TX-ring-1 */
>> -return dev->dma.tx_ring1;
>> +	/*FIXME: For now we always run on TX-ring-1 */
>> +	return dev->dma.tx_ring1;
>>  
>>  	/* 0 = highest priority */
>>  	switch (queue_priority) {
>
> Thanks for your patch.
>
> But actually, I am kind of annoyed by the constant stream of whitespace
> fixing and dead code removal and other trivial changes to this legacy
> driver.
>
> It does not improve the code to add two tabs to this _ancient_ code.
>
> And I can already see the next patch coming that removes the dead code
> after this FIXME return. And then the next patch will come to remove
> this function altogether, and so on and so on.
>
> This driver has a _lot_ of such code, because it is based on reverse
> engineered knowledge with many many unknowns.
>
> IMO this just creates additional maintenance work and pressure on our
> maintainers for no good reason.

Yeah, the cleanup patches are a problem. Even more so that there can be
people who deliberately try to submit compromised code:

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202105051005.49BFABCE@keescook/

brtfs has a pretty good summary about their feelings towards cleanup
patches:

https://btrfs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/dev/Developer-s-FAQ.html#how-not-to-start

Johannes and me have been talking that we should write something similar
for wireless. Maybe we should start by adding that link to our
documentation :)

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches