linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] wfx: add support for WoWLAN on Silabs WF200

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: <98e39be3351190ec71ffb067c062c82883ebef24.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2025 08:40:51 +0100
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To: Jérôme Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@...abs.com>, 
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>, 
	linux-devel@...abs.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] wfx: add support for WoWLAN on Silabs WF200

On Tue, 2025-03-04 at 16:22 +0100, Jérôme Pouiller wrote:
> 
> Patchwork also reports two warnings that I am going to ignore:
> 
>   - "Target tree name not specified in the subject", I assume it
>     is "wireless-next", but in the doubt I prefer to refrain.

It should be wireless-next for anything that isn't fixes for the current
cycle, and please do add it - without it the checker won't always be
able to pick up the patches to test them:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/ec3a3d891acfe5ed8763271a1df4151d75daf25f.camel@sipsolutions.net/

>   - Lines are larger then 80 columns. Checkpatch.pl now accepts up
>     to 100 columns. I am not aware any local exception in net/, right?

It looks like that's not documented
(https://docs.kernel.org/process/maintainer-netdev.html), but I had a
conversation with Jakub about this in the past and he prefers to have
the checks still at 80 because people were, in his telling, abusing it
in a way and making really long lines for no good reason.

I'm not going to be super strict about it, but I'd encourage everyone
who sees that warning to see if they can do better.

In this particular case, it's just a comment, so could trivially be
wrapped, but I'm not going to complain about 85 columns. If someone's
going to 100 columns with (text) comments though then I think that'd
raise some eyebrows. Narrower text is easier to read anyway.

johannes