From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752721AbcBCL1O (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Feb 2016 06:27:14 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f68.google.com ([74.125.82.68]:32962 "EHLO mail-wm0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751274AbcBCL1M (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Feb 2016 06:27:12 -0500 Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 12:27:05 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Matt Fleming Cc: "H . Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Jones , Ard Biesheuvel Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/14] efi: Make checkpatch complain less about efi.h GUID additions Message-ID: <20160203112704.GA27850@gmail.com> References: <1454364428-494-1-git-send-email-matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> <1454364428-494-11-git-send-email-matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> <20160203103335.GA7310@gmail.com> <20160203104432.GA2597@codeblueprint.co.uk> <20160203105035.GB21257@gmail.com> <20160203111838.GB2597@codeblueprint.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160203111838.GB2597@codeblueprint.co.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Matt Fleming wrote: > On Wed, 03 Feb, at 11:50:35AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > Hm, so the GUIDs are line-broken in the same fashion in the spec, after the third > > parameter? > > Yep, they are. > > > That's a strong reason indeed - and then the changelog and title should say that: > > 're-format GUID tables to follow the format of the UEFI spec'. That it also > > pacifies checkpatch is a side effect. > > I think that's a fair change. > > Peter could you take a look at updating the changelog in a v2? If not, > I'll do it. Note that I applied most of your patches to tip:efi/core, which I've just pushed out. You might want to base v2 on that. Thanks, Ingo From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/14] efi: Make checkpatch complain less about efi.h GUID additions Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 12:27:05 +0100 Message-ID: <20160203112704.GA27850@gmail.com> References: <1454364428-494-1-git-send-email-matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> <1454364428-494-11-git-send-email-matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> <20160203103335.GA7310@gmail.com> <20160203104432.GA2597@codeblueprint.co.uk> <20160203105035.GB21257@gmail.com> <20160203111838.GB2597@codeblueprint.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160203111838.GB2597-mF/unelCI9GS6iBeEJttW/XRex20P6io@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-efi-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Matt Fleming Cc: "H . Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Peter Jones , Ard Biesheuvel List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org * Matt Fleming wrote: > On Wed, 03 Feb, at 11:50:35AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > Hm, so the GUIDs are line-broken in the same fashion in the spec, after the third > > parameter? > > Yep, they are. > > > That's a strong reason indeed - and then the changelog and title should say that: > > 're-format GUID tables to follow the format of the UEFI spec'. That it also > > pacifies checkpatch is a side effect. > > I think that's a fair change. > > Peter could you take a look at updating the changelog in a v2? If not, > I'll do it. Note that I applied most of your patches to tip:efi/core, which I've just pushed out. You might want to base v2 on that. Thanks, Ingo