From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757959Ab0JLRrE (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Oct 2010 13:47:04 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:15748 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751044Ab0JLRrB (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Oct 2010 13:47:01 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] secmark: make secmark object handling generic From: Eric Paris To: Pablo Neira Ayuso Cc: Jan Engelhardt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, netfilter@vger.kernel.org, paul.moore@hp.com, jmorris@namei.org, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov, sds@tycho.nsa.gov, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, mr.dash.four@googlemail.com In-Reply-To: <4CB499E3.5030305@netfilter.org> References: <20101012154008.26943.44399.stgit@paris.rdu.redhat.com> <20101012154015.26943.18385.stgit@paris.rdu.redhat.com> <4CB499E3.5030305@netfilter.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 13:45:33 -0400 Message-ID: <1286905533.2608.21.camel@dhcp235-107.rdu.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2010-10-12 at 19:24 +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On 12/10/10 18:26, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > On Tuesday 2010-10-12 17:40, Eric Paris wrote: > >> static struct xt_target secmark_tg_reg __read_mostly = { > >> - .name = "SECMARK", > >> - .revision = 0, > >> - .family = NFPROTO_UNSPEC, > >> - .checkentry = secmark_tg_check, > >> - .destroy = secmark_tg_destroy, > >> - .target = secmark_tg, > >> - .targetsize = sizeof(struct xt_secmark_target_info), > >> - .me = THIS_MODULE, > >> + .name = "SECMARK", > >> + .revision = 0, > >> + .family = NFPROTO_UNSPEC, > >> + .checkentry = secmark_tg_check, > >> + .destroy = secmark_tg_destroy, > >> + .target = secmark_tg, > >> + .targetsize = sizeof(struct xt_secmark_target_info), > >> + .me = THIS_MODULE, > >> }; > > I think that we don't need that extra tab above. Are you saying that you prefer lots of spaces to get alignment rather than the single tab? I see examples of both in other struct xt_target definitions. I didn't make any syntax changes to this struct, so my guess is that I made this change when I discovered eight spaces in a row as I was checking the file for tab->space screw-ups before submission. Since this is a whitespace change in the middle of a real patch I guess I can drop the hunk entirely if that's what you are asking for.... -Eric