Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley
        Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United
        Kingdom.
        Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903
From:   David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <CT5KNU3BZ71L.2S88IEDDT5AD9@suppilovahvero>
References: <CT5KNU3BZ71L.2S88IEDDT5AD9@suppilovahvero> <20230601190508.56610-1-franziska.naepelt@gmail.com> <20230602085902.59006-1-franziska.naepelt@gmail.com>
To:     "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@kernel.org>
Cc:     dhowells@redhat.com,
        "Franziska Naepelt" <franziska.naepelt@googlemail.com>,
        keyrings@vger.kernel.org, dwmw2@infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        "Franziska Naepelt" <franziska.naepelt@gmail.com>,
        "kernel test robot" <lkp@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] certs/extract-cert: Fix checkpatch issues
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1977837.1686062695.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date:   Tue, 06 Jun 2023 15:44:55 +0100
Message-ID: <1977838.1686062695@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Precedence: bulk

Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org> wrote:

> Fixes tag?

That's not really necessary in this case.  It's not fixing any bugs so much as
keeping checkpatch happy, so there's not much point backporting the patches.

> IMHO should be split to separate commits with fixes tags for
> trackability sake.

I think a single patch is fine for what it's doing.  Let's not add a bunch of
individual one-liner keeping-checkpatch-happy patches.

David