netdev - Re: [PATCH v3] staging: qlge: Fix indentation issue under long for loop

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: <20220713081434.GA20416@cloud-MacBookPro>
Date:   Wed, 13 Jul 2022 01:14:34 -0700
From:   binyi <dantengknight@...il.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Manish Chopra <manishc@...vell.com>,
        GR-Linux-NIC-Dev@...vell.com, Coiby Xu <coiby.xu@...il.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] staging: qlge: Fix indentation issue under long for
 loop

On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 11:44:39AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 01:55:24PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Mon, 2022-07-11 at 10:05 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jul 10, 2022 at 02:04:18PM -0700, Binyi Han wrote:
> > > > Fix indentation issue to adhere to Linux kernel coding style,
> > > > Issue found by checkpatch. Change the long for loop into 3 lines. And
> > > > optimize by avoiding the multiplication.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Binyi Han <dantengknight@...il.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > v2:
> > > > 	- Change the long for loop into 3 lines.
> > > > v3:
> > > > 	- Align page_entries in the for loop to open parenthesis.
> > > > 	- Optimize by avoiding the multiplication.
> > > 
> > > Please do not mix coding style fixes with "optimizations" or logical
> > > changes.  This should be multiple patches.
> > > 
> > > Also, did you test this change on real hardware?  At first glance, it's
> > > not obvious that the code is still doing the same thing, so "proof" of
> > > that would be nice to have.

I don't have access to a real hardware, so can't provide a "proof" of that.
I agree with Joe that's the same logic, and it compiles ok. But I
understand if you don't apply this patch, it's more safe with some
testing.

> > 
> > I read the code and suggested the optimization.  It's the same logic.
> > 
> > 
> 
> I appreciate the review, but it looks quite different from the original
> so it should be 2 different patches, one for coding style changes, and
> the second for the "optimization".
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

Thank you for the review. I sent a patchset, following the instruction
here:
https://kernelnewbies.org/FirstKernelPatch
And I didn't find a good way to send a patchset by mutt in a single
command, so I run "mutt -H PatchFile" several times to send it, and I hope
that is okay.

Best,
Binyi