linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] firmware: coreboot: support for parsing SMM related informations from coreboot tables

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: <aFBfcg7E38ywGD5W@google.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2025 11:16:18 -0700
From: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
To: Michal Gorlas <michal.gorlas@...ements.com>
Cc: Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...nel.org>,
	Julius Werner <jwerner@...omium.org>, marcello.bauer@...ements.com,
	chrome-platform@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] firmware: coreboot: support for parsing SMM
 related informations from coreboot tables

On Sat, Jun 14, 2025 at 02:53:18PM +0200, Michal Gorlas wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 03:37:40PM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> > > @@ -112,8 +122,8 @@ void coreboot_driver_unregister(struct coreboot_driver *driver);
> > >   * boilerplate.  Each module may only use this macro once, and
> > >   * calling it replaces module_init() and module_exit()
> > >   */
> > > -#define module_coreboot_driver(__coreboot_driver) \
> > > +#define module_coreboot_driver(__coreboot_driver)                  \
> > >  	module_driver(__coreboot_driver, coreboot_driver_register, \
> > > -			coreboot_driver_unregister)
> > > +		      coreboot_driver_unregister)
> > 
> > You're making arbitrary whitespace changes in this hunk. Try to avoid
> > that, please.
> > 
> 
> Sure, will do. It came from a style warning when running
> scripts/checkpatch.pl. I thought it could be useful to fix it on the
> same go.

That's odd, I don't see any such warning. Anyway, typically I'd expect
such things not to be lumped together under the "separate your changes"
guidance of Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst (if they're
worth changing at all), although that may not be a hard and fast rule.

Brian