[PATCH v1 0/3] SPDX cleanups and line over 80 characters fix

[PATCH v1 0/3] SPDX cleanups and line over 80 characters fix

[Jules Irenge]

This v1 series clean up SPDX and fix line over 80 characters.

Jules Irenge (3):
  staging: rtl8192e: add SPDX GPL-2.0+ license identifier
  staging: rtl8192e: remove license boilerplate text
  staging: rtl8192e: fix line over 80 characters warning

 drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c | 57 ++++++++++++++-----------------
 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)

-- 
2.20.1

[PATCH v1 1/3] staging: rtl8192e: add SPDX GPL-2.0+ license identifier

[Jules Irenge]

Add the SPDX GPL-2.0+ license identifier to fix checkpatch.pl warning
Issue found by checkpatch.pl warning:
"WARNING: Missing or malformed SPDX-License-Identifier tag in line 1"

Signed-off-by: Jules Irenge <jbi.octave@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
index 68f53013cb95..74adb45efe73 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
 /******************************************************************************
  * Copyright(c) 2008 - 2010 Realtek Corporation. All rights reserved.
  *
-- 
2.20.1

Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] staging: rtl8192e: add SPDX GPL-2.0+ license identifier

[Greg KH]

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 12:07:00AM +0000, Jules Irenge wrote:
> Add the SPDX GPL-2.0+ license identifier to fix checkpatch.pl warning
> Issue found by checkpatch.pl warning:
> "WARNING: Missing or malformed SPDX-License-Identifier tag in line 1"
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jules Irenge <jbi.octave@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
> index 68f53013cb95..74adb45efe73 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
> @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+

Why did you pick this specific license?  It does not seem to match the
license text in this file at all.

Be _VERY_ careful when doing stuff like this.  If you get the license
wrong, lawyers can get mad at you :(

Also, the file name "dot11d.c" should be in the subject line, as you are
not adding the identifer to the whole driver, only one file.

Please fix this up and resend the whole series.

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] staging: rtl8192e: add SPDX GPL-2.0+ license identifier

[Jules Octave]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2111 bytes --]

>Why did you pick this specific license?  It does not seem to match the
>license text in this file at all.

>Be _VERY_ careful when doing stuff like this.  If you get the license
>wrong, lawyers can get mad at you :(

>Also, the file name "dot11d.c" should be in the subject line, as you are
>not adding the identifer to the whole driver, only one file.

>Please fix this up and resend the whole series.

>thanks,

I read online that the default license is GPL-2.0+  as it is not indicated
in the file. I think I was wrong. I would have asked the maintainer first.
Okay, I will just reset it and try to think how to deal with it . I have in
mind a GPL 1.0+ as it covers from 1 and above, I don t know if it can be
fine. I have to ask the maintainer. I am sorry.

*Kind regards*


*Jules*
*..*
BCS West Yorkshire Secretary
Positive action combined with positive thinking results in success - Shiv
Khera


On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 03:04, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 12:07:00AM +0000, Jules Irenge wrote:
> > Add the SPDX GPL-2.0+ license identifier to fix checkpatch.pl warning
> > Issue found by checkpatch.pl warning:
> > "WARNING: Missing or malformed SPDX-License-Identifier tag in line 1"
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jules Irenge <jbi.octave@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
> b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
> > index 68f53013cb95..74adb45efe73 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
> > @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
>
> Why did you pick this specific license?  It does not seem to match the
> license text in this file at all.
>
> Be _VERY_ careful when doing stuff like this.  If you get the license
> wrong, lawyers can get mad at you :(
>
> Also, the file name "dot11d.c" should be in the subject line, as you are
> not adding the identifer to the whole driver, only one file.
>
> Please fix this up and resend the whole series.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3838 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] staging: rtl8192e: add SPDX GPL-2.0+ license identifier

[Greg KH]

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 10:15:03PM +0000, Jules Octave wrote:
> >Why did you pick this specific license?  It does not seem to match the
> >license text in this file at all.
> 
> >Be _VERY_ careful when doing stuff like this.  If you get the license
> >wrong, lawyers can get mad at you :(
> 
> >Also, the file name "dot11d.c" should be in the subject line, as you are
> >not adding the identifer to the whole driver, only one file.
> 
> >Please fix this up and resend the whole series.
> 
> >thanks,
> 
> I read online that the default license is GPL-2.0+  as it is not indicated
> in the file. I think I was wrong. I would have asked the maintainer first.

Where did you read that?  The default license for the Linux kernel is
"GPL-2.0" no "+" at all.

> Okay, I will just reset it and try to think how to deal with it . I have in
> mind a GPL 1.0+ as it covers from 1 and above, I don t know if it can be
> fine. I have to ask the maintainer. I am sorry.

As the wording of the text says to refer to the LICENSE file, and that
is GPLv2, that should be the license for this file as well.

But if you do not understand license issues, I would stay away from this
and work on other tasks.  It's tricky and people get upset if you get it
wrong :)

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] staging: rtl8192e: add SPDX GPL-2.0+ license identifier

[Jules Octave]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2053 bytes --]

>As the wording of the text says to refer to the LICENSE file, and that
>is GPLv2, that should be the license for this file as well.

>But if you do not understand license issues, I would stay away from this
>and work on other tasks.  It's tricky and people get upset if you get it
>wrong :)

>thanks,

>greg k-h

I am sorry about that , I will not guess next time. I will be more careful.
I will update it to v2. I have also seen in the header it's GPL-2.0 🙈

*Jules*
*..*
BCS West Yorkshire Secretary
Positive action combined with positive thinking results in success - Shiv
Khera


On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 22:40, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 10:15:03PM +0000, Jules Octave wrote:
> > >Why did you pick this specific license?  It does not seem to match the
> > >license text in this file at all.
> >
> > >Be _VERY_ careful when doing stuff like this.  If you get the license
> > >wrong, lawyers can get mad at you :(
> >
> > >Also, the file name "dot11d.c" should be in the subject line, as you are
> > >not adding the identifer to the whole driver, only one file.
> >
> > >Please fix this up and resend the whole series.
> >
> > >thanks,
> >
> > I read online that the default license is GPL-2.0+  as it is not
> indicated
> > in the file. I think I was wrong. I would have asked the maintainer
> first.
>
> Where did you read that?  The default license for the Linux kernel is
> "GPL-2.0" no "+" at all.
>
> > Okay, I will just reset it and try to think how to deal with it . I have
> in
> > mind a GPL 1.0+ as it covers from 1 and above, I don t know if it can be
> > fine. I have to ask the maintainer. I am sorry.
>
> As the wording of the text says to refer to the LICENSE file, and that
> is GPLv2, that should be the license for this file as well.
>
> But if you do not understand license issues, I would stay away from this
> and work on other tasks.  It's tricky and people get upset if you get it
> wrong :)
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3599 bytes --]

[PATCH v1 2/3] staging: rtl8192e: remove license boilerplate text

[Jules Irenge]

Remove license boilerplate text.

Signed-off-by: Jules Irenge <jbi.octave@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c | 8 --------
 1 file changed, 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
index 74adb45efe73..721892cef3a7 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
@@ -2,14 +2,6 @@
 /******************************************************************************
  * Copyright(c) 2008 - 2010 Realtek Corporation. All rights reserved.
  *
- * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT
- * ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or
- * FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU General Public License for
- * more details.
- *
- * The full GNU General Public License is included in this distribution in the
- * file called LICENSE.
- *
  * Contact Information:
  * wlanfae <wlanfae@realtek.com>
  ******************************************************************************/
-- 
2.20.1

[PATCH v1 3/3] staging: rtl8192e: fix line over 80 characters warning

[Jules Irenge]

Replace dot11d_info with dt1d_inf to fix checkpatch.pl warning
 Issue found by checkpatch.pl:
 "WARNING: line over 80 characters"

Signed-off-by: Jules Irenge <jbi.octave@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c | 48 +++++++++++++++----------------
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
index 721892cef3a7..17738859b197 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
@@ -37,14 +37,14 @@ static struct channel_list channel_array[] = {
 
 void dot11d_init(struct rtllib_device *ieee)
 {
-	struct rt_dot11d_info *dot11d_info = GET_DOT11D_INFO(ieee);
+	struct rt_dot11d_info *dt1d_inf = GET_DOT11D_INFO(ieee);
 
-	dot11d_info->enabled = false;
+	dt1d_inf->enabled = false;
 
-	dot11d_info->state = DOT11D_STATE_NONE;
-	dot11d_info->country_len = 0;
-	memset(dot11d_info->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
-	memset(dot11d_info->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
+	dt1d_inf->state = DOT11D_STATE_NONE;
+	dt1d_inf->country_len = 0;
+	memset(dt1d_inf->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
+	memset(dt1d_inf->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
 	RESET_CIE_WATCHDOG(ieee);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(dot11d_init);
@@ -93,29 +93,29 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(dot11d_channel_map);
 
 void dot11d_reset(struct rtllib_device *ieee)
 {
-	struct rt_dot11d_info *dot11d_info = GET_DOT11D_INFO(ieee);
+	struct rt_dot11d_info *dt1d_inf = GET_DOT11D_INFO(ieee);
 	u32 i;
 
-	memset(dot11d_info->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
-	memset(dot11d_info->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
+	memset(dt1d_inf->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
+	memset(dt1d_inf->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
 	for (i = 1; i <= 11; i++)
-		(dot11d_info->channel_map)[i] = 1;
+		(dt1d_inf->channel_map)[i] = 1;
 	for (i = 12; i <= 14; i++)
-		(dot11d_info->channel_map)[i] = 2;
-	dot11d_info->state = DOT11D_STATE_NONE;
-	dot11d_info->country_len = 0;
+		(dt1d_inf->channel_map)[i] = 2;
+	dt1d_inf->state = DOT11D_STATE_NONE;
+	dt1d_inf->country_len = 0;
 	RESET_CIE_WATCHDOG(ieee);
 }
 
 void dot11d_update_country(struct rtllib_device *dev, u8 *address,
 			   u16 country_len, u8 *country)
 {
-	struct rt_dot11d_info *dot11d_info = GET_DOT11D_INFO(dev);
+	struct rt_dot11d_info *dt1d_inf = GET_DOT11D_INFO(dev);
 	u8 i, j, number_of_triples, max_channel_number;
 	struct chnl_txpow_triple *triple;
 
-	memset(dot11d_info->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
-	memset(dot11d_info->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
+	memset(dt1d_inf->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
+	memset(dt1d_inf->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
 	max_channel_number = 0;
 	number_of_triples = (country_len - 3) / 3;
 	triple = (struct chnl_txpow_triple *)(country + 3);
@@ -135,8 +135,8 @@ void dot11d_update_country(struct rtllib_device *dev, u8 *address,
 		}
 
 		for (j = 0; j < triple->num_channels; j++) {
-			dot11d_info->channel_map[triple->first_channel + j] = 1;
-			dot11d_info->max_tx_power_list[triple->first_channel + j] =
+			dt1d_inf->channel_map[triple->first_channel + j] = 1;
+			dt1d_inf->max_tx_power_list[triple->first_channel + j] =
 						 triple->max_tx_power;
 			max_channel_number = triple->first_channel + j;
 		}
@@ -146,18 +146,18 @@ void dot11d_update_country(struct rtllib_device *dev, u8 *address,
 
 	UPDATE_CIE_SRC(dev, address);
 
-	dot11d_info->country_len = country_len;
-	memcpy(dot11d_info->country_buffer, country, country_len);
-	dot11d_info->state = DOT11D_STATE_LEARNED;
+	dt1d_inf->country_len = country_len;
+	memcpy(dt1d_inf->country_buffer, country, country_len);
+	dt1d_inf->state = DOT11D_STATE_LEARNED;
 }
 
 void dot11d_scan_complete(struct rtllib_device *dev)
 {
-	struct rt_dot11d_info *dot11d_info = GET_DOT11D_INFO(dev);
+	struct rt_dot11d_info *dt1d_inf = GET_DOT11D_INFO(dev);
 
-	switch (dot11d_info->state) {
+	switch (dt1d_inf->state) {
 	case DOT11D_STATE_LEARNED:
-		dot11d_info->state = DOT11D_STATE_DONE;
+		dt1d_inf->state = DOT11D_STATE_DONE;
 		break;
 	case DOT11D_STATE_DONE:
 		dot11d_reset(dev);
-- 
2.20.1

Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] staging: rtl8192e: fix line over 80 characters warning

[Greg KH]

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 12:07:02AM +0000, Jules Irenge wrote:
> Replace dot11d_info with dt1d_inf to fix checkpatch.pl warning
>  Issue found by checkpatch.pl:
>  "WARNING: line over 80 characters"
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jules Irenge <jbi.octave@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c | 48 +++++++++++++++----------------
>  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
> index 721892cef3a7..17738859b197 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c
> @@ -37,14 +37,14 @@ static struct channel_list channel_array[] = {
>  
>  void dot11d_init(struct rtllib_device *ieee)
>  {
> -	struct rt_dot11d_info *dot11d_info = GET_DOT11D_INFO(ieee);
> +	struct rt_dot11d_info *dt1d_inf = GET_DOT11D_INFO(ieee);

No, the original variable name is fine, don't shorten things for no good
reason.

>  
> -	dot11d_info->enabled = false;
> +	dt1d_inf->enabled = false;
>  
> -	dot11d_info->state = DOT11D_STATE_NONE;
> -	dot11d_info->country_len = 0;
> -	memset(dot11d_info->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
> -	memset(dot11d_info->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
> +	dt1d_inf->state = DOT11D_STATE_NONE;
> +	dt1d_inf->country_len = 0;
> +	memset(dt1d_inf->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
> +	memset(dt1d_inf->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
>  	RESET_CIE_WATCHDOG(ieee);
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(dot11d_init);

None of those lines were over 80 characters, so why did you change
anything here?

> @@ -93,29 +93,29 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(dot11d_channel_map);
>  
>  void dot11d_reset(struct rtllib_device *ieee)
>  {
> -	struct rt_dot11d_info *dot11d_info = GET_DOT11D_INFO(ieee);
> +	struct rt_dot11d_info *dt1d_inf = GET_DOT11D_INFO(ieee);
>  	u32 i;
>  
> -	memset(dot11d_info->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
> -	memset(dot11d_info->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
> +	memset(dt1d_inf->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
> +	memset(dt1d_inf->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
>  	for (i = 1; i <= 11; i++)
> -		(dot11d_info->channel_map)[i] = 1;
> +		(dt1d_inf->channel_map)[i] = 1;
>  	for (i = 12; i <= 14; i++)
> -		(dot11d_info->channel_map)[i] = 2;
> -	dot11d_info->state = DOT11D_STATE_NONE;
> -	dot11d_info->country_len = 0;
> +		(dt1d_inf->channel_map)[i] = 2;
> +	dt1d_inf->state = DOT11D_STATE_NONE;
> +	dt1d_inf->country_len = 0;
>  	RESET_CIE_WATCHDOG(ieee);
>  }

Same with this function, what is wrong with it as-is?

>  
>  void dot11d_update_country(struct rtllib_device *dev, u8 *address,
>  			   u16 country_len, u8 *country)
>  {
> -	struct rt_dot11d_info *dot11d_info = GET_DOT11D_INFO(dev);
> +	struct rt_dot11d_info *dt1d_inf = GET_DOT11D_INFO(dev);
>  	u8 i, j, number_of_triples, max_channel_number;
>  	struct chnl_txpow_triple *triple;
>  
> -	memset(dot11d_info->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
> -	memset(dot11d_info->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
> +	memset(dt1d_inf->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
> +	memset(dt1d_inf->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1);
>  	max_channel_number = 0;
>  	number_of_triples = (country_len - 3) / 3;
>  	triple = (struct chnl_txpow_triple *)(country + 3);

Same here.

> @@ -135,8 +135,8 @@ void dot11d_update_country(struct rtllib_device *dev, u8 *address,
>  		}
>  
>  		for (j = 0; j < triple->num_channels; j++) {
> -			dot11d_info->channel_map[triple->first_channel + j] = 1;
> -			dot11d_info->max_tx_power_list[triple->first_channel + j] =
> +			dt1d_inf->channel_map[triple->first_channel + j] = 1;
> +			dt1d_inf->max_tx_power_list[triple->first_channel + j] =
>  						 triple->max_tx_power;
>  			max_channel_number = triple->first_channel + j;
>  		}

Ok, that one line is "too long", but really, it is fine as-is, no need
to change it.

> @@ -146,18 +146,18 @@ void dot11d_update_country(struct rtllib_device *dev, u8 *address,
>  
>  	UPDATE_CIE_SRC(dev, address);
>  
> -	dot11d_info->country_len = country_len;
> -	memcpy(dot11d_info->country_buffer, country, country_len);
> -	dot11d_info->state = DOT11D_STATE_LEARNED;
> +	dt1d_inf->country_len = country_len;
> +	memcpy(dt1d_inf->country_buffer, country, country_len);
> +	dt1d_inf->state = DOT11D_STATE_LEARNED;
>  }
>  
>  void dot11d_scan_complete(struct rtllib_device *dev)
>  {
> -	struct rt_dot11d_info *dot11d_info = GET_DOT11D_INFO(dev);
> +	struct rt_dot11d_info *dt1d_inf = GET_DOT11D_INFO(dev);
>  
> -	switch (dot11d_info->state) {
> +	switch (dt1d_inf->state) {
>  	case DOT11D_STATE_LEARNED:
> -		dot11d_info->state = DOT11D_STATE_DONE;
> +		dt1d_inf->state = DOT11D_STATE_DONE;
>  		break;
>  	case DOT11D_STATE_DONE:
>  		dot11d_reset(dev);

Why change these lines?

As was said before, checkpatch is a hint, not a hard rule.  You always
need to think when making changes.

thanks,

greg k-h