On Thu 2022-02-10 13:01 +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Why do patches 7 to 13 have a Reply-to:
> 20220209170358.3266629-1-atomlin@xxxxxxxxxx and not patches 1 to 6 ?
Christophe,
Please disregard this mishap. Unfortunately, at the time I hit the relay
quota.
> > diff --git a/include/linux/module.h b/include/linux/module.h
> > index fd6161d78127..aea0ffd94a41 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/module.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/module.h
> > @@ -863,6 +863,7 @@ static inline bool module_sig_ok(struct module *module)
> > {
> > return true;
> > }
> > +#define sig_enforce false
> sig_enforce is used only in signing.c so it should be defined there
> exclusively.
Agreed.
> And checkpatch is not happy:
>
> CHECK: Please use a blank line after function/struct/union/enum declarations
> #27: FILE: include/linux/module.h:866:
> }
> +#define sig_enforce false
Ok.
Kind regards,
--
Aaron Tomlin
