linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] checkpatch: suggest including testing evidence

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: <2025072216-properly-chowtime-0485@gregkh>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2025 09:59:05 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Ignacio Peña <ignacio.pena87@...il.com>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
	Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@...il.com>,
	Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] checkpatch: suggest including testing evidence

On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 12:24:34PM -0400, Ignacio Peña wrote:
> For non-trivial changes, it's valuable to know how the change was
> tested. Add a gentle suggestion when commit messages don't mention
> any testing, verification, or validation.
> 
> This is a CHECK level notification, not a WARNING, as testing methods
> vary greatly depending on the subsystem and type of change.
> 
> The check is skipped for very short commit messages (documentation
> fixes, typos) where testing information would be excessive.

This will cause people to write short commit messages in order to avoid
this type of warning.

I don't think this is a necessary check at all, I can't remember the
last time any patch I wrote would pass this check :)

thanks,

greg k-h