| 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
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 09:48:16 +0100 From: Ian Morris <ipm@...rality.org.uk> To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: RFC : [PATCH] IPV6: checkpatch whitespace corrections Many thanks for taking the time to provide feedback. Accordingly I will break the patch into better structured parts and submit. On 13/08/14 23:46, Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2014-08-13 at 21:02 +0100, Ian Morris wrote: >> I started looking at the ipv6 code to educate myself but in the process >> noticed a fair few trivial checkpatch issues. There are some more interesting >> ones also present but before tackling those I decided to try to reduce the >> volume of output from checkpatch by fixing whitespace issues. Question is >> are such patches wanted? > Like most things, it depends. > > To make reviewing these patches easier, it's better to > separate these changes into at least 2 patches. > > 1: Horizontal line whitespace changes where git diff -w can be > shown to have no differences > 2: Vertical line whitespace changes where newlines are only > added or deleted. > > In both cases, scripts/objdiff should be run to show no compiler > object output changes occur as well. > > In a quick scan, I don't see anything objectionable here. > > I'm not a big fan of the forced blank line between declarations > and code though. > > You can get checkpatch to not emit those with --ignore=line_spacing > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists