netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/4] bpf: fix formatting, typos, reflow comments in syscall.c, verifier.c

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: <831958de-985b-d150-d0d0-296e6c6cbec4@iogearbox.net>
Date:   Fri, 1 Mar 2019 01:28:46 +0100
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     Song Liu <liu.song.a23@...il.com>, Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>
Cc:     Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>, ast@...com,
        yhs@...com, Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/4] bpf: fix formatting, typos, reflow comments
 in syscall.c, verifier.c

On 03/01/2019 01:27 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 02/28/2019 11:40 PM, Song Liu wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 10:59 AM Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Fix few formatting errors. Fix few typos and reflow long descriptive
>>> comments for more even text fill.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>
>>
>> I think we should not change the code for formatting, as these changes make
>> git-blame more difficult. How about we only make changes to comments?
> 
> Kind of true, though git blame is imho not too useful (unless I'm missing
> some git magic :)); git log -p has much more historical context to search
> through. I think these cleanups below are okay, though my worry is that
> for someone doing backports changes that are scattered like this mainly
> cause conflicts which then gets painful to resolve. I think we could make
> it work if they are split and more isolated, e.g. syscall ones could be
> one commit, another one only touching the big contiguous verifier comment,
> and so on.

(Ideally also separate from the doc-only patches which is the rest of your
 series.)