linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 01/18] staging: gpib: struct typing for gpib

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: <aAAXB60zJWB1qRHJ@tiamat>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 20:45:59 +0000
From: Michael Rubin <matchstick@...erthere.org>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>, dpenkler@...il.com,
	linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 01/18] staging: gpib: struct typing for gpib_interface

On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 04:41:47PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 05:52:51PM +0000, Michael Rubin wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 11:26:41AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 08, 2025 at 10:24:47PM +0000, Michael Rubin wrote:
> > > > Using Linux code style for gpib_interface struct in .h to allow drivers to
> > > > migrate.
> > > > 
> > > > Adhering to Linux code style.
> > > > 
> > > > In general, a pointer, or a struct that has elements that can reasonably be
> > > > directly accessed should never be a typedef.
> > > > 
> > > > Reported by CheckPatch
> > > > 
> > > > WARNING: do not add new typedefs
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > This commit message is quite long but it's totally unrelated to what the
> > > patch does.
> > > 
> > > This commit message should just say "Having the word "_struct" in the
> > > name of the struct doesn't add any information so rename struct
> > > gpib_interface_struct to struct gpib_interface."
> > 
> > Thank you for the input. New commit marked v2 sent to the list.
> 
> I think we need a whole new v2 series, I can't just pick up 1 of the 18
> patches as a v2 as our tools will get very confused.  Can you just
> rebase and resend a v3 for the whole thing?

I sent a new series. Hope that it looks ok.

Michael