Re: [PATCH 1/6] x86/efi: Allow invocation of arbitrary runtime services
From: Joe Perches
Date: Tue Nov 22 2016 - 11:25:50 EST
On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 15:52 +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > Small nit, checkpatch usually complains that this should be written as
> > > > 12-character SHA-1 followed by the commit subject, i.e.
> > > >
> > > > 0a637ee61247 ("x86/efi: Allow invocation of arbitrary boot services")
> > >
> > > In this case, checkpatch is wrong.
> > Why do you think so?
> Actually, checkpatch doesn't complain about embedded commit IDs anymore, so in
> that case, it's just about acceptable.
checkpatch still emits warnings about the format of
What version of checkpatch are yuu using?
> Apart from that, I think we should put in the full SHA-1 commit. The
> probability of a collision in a 12-digit hex number for the >5,000,000 commits
> just in Linus's tree is currently at ~4.5% and gradually increasing. Add in
> all the commits in not-yet-upstreamed trees - which might be another million
> commits, say - then we're over 6%..
Umm, no, that's not correct.
SHA-1 lengths of 12 are unique for quite awhile yet.
Using Linus' tree today, from commit 3b404a519815
the current output of the git-uniq-abbrev script is:
4: 5048673 / 65536
5: 5007413 / 998721
6: 1312496 / 623343
7: 94487 / 47089
8: 6163 / 3081
9: 416 / 208
10: 28 / 14
11: 4 / 2
12: 0 / 0
> Oh, yes, and speaking of checkpatch, can you make it so that if it sees:
> commit 12345...
> Author: foo <foo@bar>
> Date: blah
> Subject line
> Description lines
> diff ...
> with the all description indented by 4 spaces, then assume that it's the
> output of git show and not give the warnings about signed-off-by and other
> things being indented?
No. Use --format=email as appropriate instead.