Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 1:53 PM Utkarsh Verma <utkarshverma294@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Add a new message type SYMBOLIC_PERMS under the 'Permissions' >> subsection. Octal permission bits are easier to read and understand >> instead of their symbolic macro names. >> >> Suggested-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@xxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Utkarsh Verma <utkarshverma294@xxxxxxxxx> >> Acked-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@xxxxxxxxx> >> Reviewed-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst | 11 +++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst >> index f0956e9ea2d8..41037594ec24 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst >> +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst >> @@ -957,6 +957,17 @@ Permissions >> Permission bits should use 4 digit octal permissions (like 0700 or 0444). >> Avoid using any other base like decimal. >> >> + **SYMBOLIC_PERMS** >> + Permission bits in the octal form are more readable and easier to >> + understand than their symbolic counterparts because many command-line >> + tools use this notation only. Experienced kernel developers have been using > > Let's remove "only". > >> + this traditional Unix permission bits for decades and so they find it > > Maybe you meant "these" here. > > With these changes made, > Acked-by: Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@xxxxxxxxx> I took the liberty of apply the patch with those changes made. Thanks, jon
