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  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]
Date:	Wed, 31 Dec 2014 19:04:30 +0100
From:	Bas Peters <baspeters93@...il.com>
To:	Jeremiah Mahler <jmmahler@...il.com>,
	Bas Peters <baspeters93@...il.com>, hjlipp@....de,
	tilman@...p.cc, isdn@...ux-pingi.de,
	gigaset307x-common@...ts.sourceforge.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Drivers: isdn: gigaset: checkpatch cleanup

2014-12-31 18:49 GMT+01:00 Jeremiah Mahler <jmmahler@...il.com>:
> Bas,
>
> On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 06:34:58PM +0100, Bas Peters wrote:
>> Fixed many checkpatch.pl complaints, ranging from whitespace issues to
>> reportedly deprecated function and macro usage.
>>
> One patch should fix one type of problem.  This needs to be broken up
> in to individual patches.
>
>> I have not been able to test the code as I do not have access to the
>> hardware but since no new features were really added I don't think that
>> should pose a problem.
>>
>> There are still some checkpatch complaints, particularly concerning
>> potentially unnecessary 'out of memory' messages. I will provide patches
>> for these complaints when I figure out the reason behind it and what to
>> do about it.
>>
>> NOTE: This is my first patch (ever). I have attempted to follow all
>> guidelines provided, but I probably will have missed some. If you have
>> any comments regarding the quality of this patch or suggestions as to
>> what I could do better in the future, please let me know.
>>
> You are ambitious.  I would suggest trying a smaller patch first to
> make sure you are doing everything right.

With 'smaller patch', do you refer to less files at once or a different driver?
Is it generally preferred to send patches that relate to the same
issue (changes to a single file,
grouping of patches to tackle the same issue, such as conversion of a
specific function) over
patch(sets) that deal with an entire driver?

Thanks for the advice!

>
>> Signed-off-by: Bas Peters <baspeters93@...il.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/isdn/gigaset/asyncdata.c   |  9 +++--
>>  drivers/isdn/gigaset/bas-gigaset.c | 80 ++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>>  drivers/isdn/gigaset/capi.c        |  5 ++-
>>  drivers/isdn/gigaset/common.c      |  8 ++--
>>  drivers/isdn/gigaset/ev-layer.c    | 38 +++++++++++-------
>>  drivers/isdn/gigaset/gigaset.h     |  4 +-
>>  drivers/isdn/gigaset/i4l.c         | 12 +++---
>>  drivers/isdn/gigaset/interface.c   | 10 ++---
>>  drivers/isdn/gigaset/isocdata.c    |  3 ++
>>  drivers/isdn/gigaset/proc.c        | 17 +++++---
>>  drivers/isdn/gigaset/usb-gigaset.c | 46 +++++++++++++++-------
>>  11 files changed, 141 insertions(+), 91 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/isdn/gigaset/asyncdata.c b/drivers/isdn/gigaset/asyncdata.c
> [...]
>
> --
> - Jeremiah Mahler
--
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