From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> To: "Andreas Färber" <afaerber@suse.de> Cc: "Nishad Kamdar" <nishadkamdar@gmail.com>, "Manivannan Sadhasivam" <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>, "Michael Turquette" <mturquette@baylibre.com>, "Stephen Boyd" <sboyd@kernel.org>, "Joe Perches" <joe@perches.com>, "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-actions@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: actions: Use the correct style for SPDX License Identifier Date: Thu, 2 May 2019 13:28:53 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20190502112853.GB7358@kroah.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <f52484fc-b35b-f92a-9c7b-ce53fd731ab5@suse.de> On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 12:45:05PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: > Am 02.05.19 um 12:38 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman: > > On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 12:25:36PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: > >> Am 02.05.19 um 09:07 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman: > >>> On Wed, May 01, 2019 at 10:20:44PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: > >>>> + linux-actions > >>>> > >>>> Am 01.05.19 um 09:07 schrieb Nishad Kamdar: > >>>>> This patch corrects the SPDX License Identifier style > >>>>> in header files related to Clock Drivers for Actions Semi Socs. > >>>>> For C header files Documentation/process/license-rules.rst > >>>>> mandates C-like comments (opposed to C source files where > >>>>> C++ style should be used) > >>>> [...] > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-common.h | 2 +- > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-composite.h | 2 +- > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-divider.h | 2 +- > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-factor.h | 2 +- > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-fixed-factor.h | 2 +- > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-gate.h | 2 +- > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-mux.h | 2 +- > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-pll.h | 2 +- > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-reset.h | 2 +- > >>>>> 9 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> Where's the practical benefit of this patch? These are all private > >>>> headers used from C files, so they can handle C++ comments just fine, > >>>> otherwise we would've seen build failures. > >>> > >>> Please read Documentation/process/license-rules.rst, the section > >>> entitled "Style", for what the documented formats are for SPDX lines, > >>> depending on the file type. > >> > >> That does in no way answer my question! You conveniently dropped my > >> paragraph indicating that I understand why we would do that for public > >> headers in include/, but none of these private headers here are included > >> in .lds files. So there really seems to be no benefit of switching from > >> one style to another for in-tree code. > > > > It should answer the question, it was "decreed" that all header files > > use /* */, and all C files use // for their SPDX lines, so we documented > > it that way. > > > > Yes, maybe it doesn't make "sense" in that this really is only needed > > for headers that get included into asm files, which is why we had to do > > it this way, but it's better to be consistant than to have random > > breakages at times. > > > > It's not an issue of public headers at all, sorry. > > > > Consistency is good, as we can have automatic tools check these types of > > things, which is the only way to reliably handle the format of something > > that needs to be in every file in a project with 63,100+ different > > files. > > Okay, if it's about consistency then there will be more cases to fix. Agreed, hopefully checkpatch is up to date enough to catch these. > What about this one: > > My interpretation of the documentation has been that I should end the > comment after the identifiers: > > /* SPDX-... */ > /* ... > */ Correct. > Some people deviate by doing > > /* SPDX-... > * foo > */ Not correct. > So the documentation may need to be extended to clarify that for full > consistency, as well as clarify the previous scenario: > "If a specific tool cannot handle the standard comment style, then the > appropriate comment mechanism which the tool accepts shall be used." > To me that reads very different from what you just said above. Documentation can always be updated, a patch to make it clearer is always appreciated. But look at what we have today in the document, I think it should be pretty obvious that: /* SPDX... */ is the thing to use for C header files. If you disagree, that's fine, please send a patch to make it clearer and we can all review it. thanks, greg k-h
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> To: "Andreas Färber" <afaerber@suse.de> Cc: "Nishad Kamdar" <nishadkamdar@gmail.com>, "Stephen Boyd" <sboyd@kernel.org>, "Michael Turquette" <mturquette@baylibre.com>, "Manivannan Sadhasivam" <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>, linux-actions@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>, "Joe Perches" <joe@perches.com>, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: actions: Use the correct style for SPDX License Identifier Date: Thu, 2 May 2019 13:28:53 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20190502112853.GB7358@kroah.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <f52484fc-b35b-f92a-9c7b-ce53fd731ab5@suse.de> On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 12:45:05PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: > Am 02.05.19 um 12:38 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman: > > On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 12:25:36PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: > >> Am 02.05.19 um 09:07 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman: > >>> On Wed, May 01, 2019 at 10:20:44PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: > >>>> + linux-actions > >>>> > >>>> Am 01.05.19 um 09:07 schrieb Nishad Kamdar: > >>>>> This patch corrects the SPDX License Identifier style > >>>>> in header files related to Clock Drivers for Actions Semi Socs. > >>>>> For C header files Documentation/process/license-rules.rst > >>>>> mandates C-like comments (opposed to C source files where > >>>>> C++ style should be used) > >>>> [...] > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-common.h | 2 +- > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-composite.h | 2 +- > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-divider.h | 2 +- > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-factor.h | 2 +- > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-fixed-factor.h | 2 +- > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-gate.h | 2 +- > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-mux.h | 2 +- > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-pll.h | 2 +- > >>>>> drivers/clk/actions/owl-reset.h | 2 +- > >>>>> 9 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> Where's the practical benefit of this patch? These are all private > >>>> headers used from C files, so they can handle C++ comments just fine, > >>>> otherwise we would've seen build failures. > >>> > >>> Please read Documentation/process/license-rules.rst, the section > >>> entitled "Style", for what the documented formats are for SPDX lines, > >>> depending on the file type. > >> > >> That does in no way answer my question! You conveniently dropped my > >> paragraph indicating that I understand why we would do that for public > >> headers in include/, but none of these private headers here are included > >> in .lds files. So there really seems to be no benefit of switching from > >> one style to another for in-tree code. > > > > It should answer the question, it was "decreed" that all header files > > use /* */, and all C files use // for their SPDX lines, so we documented > > it that way. > > > > Yes, maybe it doesn't make "sense" in that this really is only needed > > for headers that get included into asm files, which is why we had to do > > it this way, but it's better to be consistant than to have random > > breakages at times. > > > > It's not an issue of public headers at all, sorry. > > > > Consistency is good, as we can have automatic tools check these types of > > things, which is the only way to reliably handle the format of something > > that needs to be in every file in a project with 63,100+ different > > files. > > Okay, if it's about consistency then there will be more cases to fix. Agreed, hopefully checkpatch is up to date enough to catch these. > What about this one: > > My interpretation of the documentation has been that I should end the > comment after the identifiers: > > /* SPDX-... */ > /* ... > */ Correct. > Some people deviate by doing > > /* SPDX-... > * foo > */ Not correct. > So the documentation may need to be extended to clarify that for full > consistency, as well as clarify the previous scenario: > "If a specific tool cannot handle the standard comment style, then the > appropriate comment mechanism which the tool accepts shall be used." > To me that reads very different from what you just said above. Documentation can always be updated, a patch to make it clearer is always appreciated. But look at what we have today in the document, I think it should be pretty obvious that: /* SPDX... */ is the thing to use for C header files. If you disagree, that's fine, please send a patch to make it clearer and we can all review it. thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-02 11:28 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2019-05-01 7:07 [PATCH] clk: actions: Use the correct style for SPDX License Identifier Nishad Kamdar 2019-05-01 7:07 ` Nishad Kamdar 2019-05-01 20:02 ` Stephen Boyd 2019-05-01 20:20 ` Andreas Färber 2019-05-01 20:20 ` Andreas Färber 2019-05-02 7:07 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2019-05-02 7:07 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2019-05-02 10:25 ` Andreas Färber 2019-05-02 10:25 ` Andreas Färber 2019-05-02 10:38 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2019-05-02 10:38 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2019-05-02 10:45 ` Andreas Färber 2019-05-02 10:45 ` Andreas Färber 2019-05-02 11:28 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message] 2019-05-02 11:28 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20190502112853.GB7358@kroah.com \ --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \ --cc=afaerber@suse.de \ --cc=joe@perches.com \ --cc=linux-actions@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org \ --cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \ --cc=nishadkamdar@gmail.com \ --cc=sboyd@kernel.org \ --cc=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.