All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>
To: Aditya <yashsri421@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v3] checkpatch: add fix and improve warning msg for Non-standard signature
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:18:59 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKXUXMzrBxw-Uryq04ByQ9bmS5-jyqGu18MpFNn2gPY0XeF1oQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <047b136a-3543-f193-068c-b16c5dfdf349@gmail.com>

On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 4:16 PM Aditya <yashsri421@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 23/11/20 6:39 pm, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 1:21 PM Aditya Srivastava <yashsri421@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Currently, checkpatch.pl warns for BAD_SIGN_OFF on non-standard signature
> >> styles.
> >>
> >> This warning occurs because of incorrect use of signature tags,
> >> e.g. an evaluation on v4.13..v5.8 showed the use of following incorrect
> >> signature tags, which may seem correct, but are not standard:
> >>
> >> 1) Requested-by (count: 48) => Suggested-by
> >> Rationale: In an open-source project, there are no 'requests', just
> >> 'suggestions' to convince a maintainer to accept your patch
> >>
> >> 2) Co-authored-by (count: 43) => Co-developed-by
> >> Rationale: Co-developed-by and Co-authored-by are synonyms
> >>
> >> 3) Analyzed-by (count: 22) / Analysed-by (count: 5) => Co-developed-by
> >> Rationale: Analyzing is a part of Software Development, so
> >> 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create
> >> code
> >>
> >> 4) Improvements-by (count: 19) => Co-developed-by
> >>
> >> 5) Noticed-by (count: 11) => Reported-by
> >>
> >> 6) Inspired-by (count: 11) => Suggested-by
> >>
> >> 7) Verified-by (count: 8) => Tested-by
> >> Rationale: Used by a single user. On reading mailing list, it seems
> >> Tested-by might be a suitable alternative
> >>
> >> 8) Okay-ished-by (count: 8) => Acked-by
> >> Rationale: Used by a single user. On reading mailing list, it seems
> >> Acked-by must be suitable alternative
> >>
> >> 9) Acked-for-MFD-by (count: 6) => Acked-by
> >>
> >> 10) Reviewed-off-by (count: 5) => Reviewed-by
> >>
> >> 11) Proposed-by (count: 5) => Suggested-by
> >> Rationale: On observing the mailing list, this tag is always used for a
> >> maintainer. It seems that the changes might have been suggested by them
> >> and the tag is used as acknowledgement for the same
> >>
> >> 12) Fixed-by (count: 3) => Co-developed-by
> >> Rationale: Fixing bug is a part of Software Development, so
> >> 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create
> >> code
> >>
> >> 13) Pointed-out-by (count: 3) / Pointed-at-by (count: 2) => Suggested-by
> >> Rationale: The tags are used for maintainers. It seems that the changes
> >> might have been suggested by them and the tag is used as acknowledgement
> >> for the same
> >> E.g., Pointed-at-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> >>
> >> 14) Suggestions-by (count: 3) => Suggested-by
> >>
> >> 15) Generated-by (count: 17) => remove the tag
> >> On observing the mailing list, this tag is always used for quoting the
> >> tool or script, which might have been used to generate the patch.
> >> E.g. Generated-by: scripts/coccinelle/api/alloc/kzalloc-simple.cocci
> >>
> >> 16) Celebrated-by (count: 3) => remove the tag
> >> This tag was used for only one commit. On observing mailing list, it seem
> >> like the celebration for a particular patch and changes.
> >>
> >> Provide a fix by:
> >> 1) replacing the non-standard signature with its standard equivalent
> >> 2) removing the signature if it is not required
> >>
> >> Also, improve warning messages correspondingly, providing users
> >> suggestions to either replace or remove the signature. Also provide
> >> suitable rationale to the user for the suggestion made.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Aditya Srivastava <yashsri421@gmail.com>
> >
> >
> > Looks good to me. Let us propose this to Joe for review.
> >
> Sent it. We probably still need to discuss about the remaining signatures:
> 1) "Debugged-by", 61
> 2) "Originally-by", 39
> 3) "Bisected-by", 20
> 4) "Diagnosed-by", 11
> 5) "Original-patch-by", 11
> 6) "Based-on-patch-by", 7
> 7) "Based-on-a-patch-by", 8
> 8) "Root-caused-by", 6
> 9) "Original-by", 6
> 10) "Based-on-patches-by", 5
> 11) "Based-on-work-by", 5
>
> Should I send this list as a follow-up mail?
>

Let us give Joe time to review the patch first; then if accepted, we
can continue the discussion on those tags above; you can already
propose a solution you have in mind and think about where the
documentation, checkpatch etc. needs to be adjusted.

> > Also, you can already start working on the related feature for
> > providing fixes based on the edit distance.
> >
> Okay.
>
> Thanks
> Aditya
> > With both features, we can probably fix all non-standard signatures...
> >
> > Lukas
> >
> >> ---
> >> changes in v2: replace commit specific example with brief evaluation
> >>
> >> changes in v3: provide rationale to users for every signature tag suggestion;
> >> modify commit message describing arrival to conclusion in a structured way
> >>
> >>  scripts/checkpatch.pl | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >>  1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> >> index fdfd5ec09be6..575ff8efb0eb 100755
> >> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> >> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> >> @@ -506,6 +506,81 @@ our $signature_tags = qr{(?xi:
> >>         Cc:
> >>  )};
> >>
> >> +our %standard_signature_fix = (
> >> +       "Requested-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
> >> +               rationale => "In an open-source project, there are no 'requests', just 'suggestions' to convince a maintainer to accept your patch",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Co-authored-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
> >> +               rationale => "Co-developed-by and Co-authored-by are synonyms",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Analyzed-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
> >> +               rationale => "Analyzing is a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Analysed-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
> >> +               rationale => "Analysing is a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Improvements-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
> >> +               rationale => "Performing improvements are a part of Software Developement, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Noticed-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "Reported-by:",
> >> +               rationale => "Reported-by and Noticed-by are synonyms",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Inspired-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
> >> +               rationale => "Suggested-by is the standard signature tag for acknowledging user for their suggestions",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Verified-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "Tested-by:",
> >> +               rationale => "Tested-by and Verified-by are synonyms",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Okay-ished-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "Acked-by:",
> >> +               rationale => "Acked-by is the standard signature tag for recording your approval",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Acked-for-MFD-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "Acked-by:",
> >> +               rationale => "Acked-by is the standard signature tag for recording your approval",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Reviewed-off-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "Reviewed-by:",
> >> +               rationale => "Reviewed-by is the standard signature tag for recording your approval",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Proposed-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
> >> +               rationale => "Proposing changes is same as suggesting changes, so Suggested-by seems perfectly fine",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Fixed-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
> >> +               rationale => "Fixing bug is a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Pointed-out-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
> >> +               rationale => "Pointing out certain changes is synonymous to suggesting changes, so Suggested-by seems perfectly fine",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Pointed-at-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
> >> +               rationale => "Pointing at certain changes is synonymous to suggesting changes, so Suggested-by seems perfectly fine",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Suggestions-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
> >> +               rationale => "Suggested-by is the standard signature tag for acknowledging user for their suggestions",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Generated-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "remove",
> >> +               rationale => "Signature tags are used to acknowledge users for their contributions. It is advised to describe about tools in commit description instead",
> >> +       },
> >> +       "Celebrated-by:" => {
> >> +               suggestion => "remove",
> >> +               rationale => "Signature tags are used to acknowledge users for their contributions. This tag may not be required at all",
> >> +       },
> >> +);
> >> +
> >>  our @typeListMisordered = (
> >>         qr{char\s+(?:un)?signed},
> >>         qr{int\s+(?:(?:un)?signed\s+)?short\s},
> >> @@ -2773,8 +2848,30 @@ sub process {
> >>                         my $ucfirst_sign_off = ucfirst(lc($sign_off));
> >>
> >>                         if ($sign_off !~ /$signature_tags/) {
> >> -                               WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
> >> -                                    "Non-standard signature: $sign_off\n" . $herecurr);
> >> +                               my $suggested_signature = "";
> >> +                               my $rationale = "";
> >> +                               if (exists($standard_signature_fix{$sign_off})) {
> >> +                                       $suggested_signature = $standard_signature_fix{$sign_off}{'suggestion'};
> >> +                                       $rationale = $standard_signature_fix{$sign_off}{'rationale'};
> >> +                               }
> >> +                               if ($suggested_signature eq "") {
> >> +                                       WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
> >> +                                            "Non-standard signature: $sign_off\n" . $herecurr);
> >> +                               }
> >> +                               elsif ($suggested_signature eq "remove") {
> >> +                                       if (WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
> >> +                                               "Non-standard signature: $sign_off. Please consider removing this signature tag. $rationale\n" . $herecurr) &&
> >> +                                       $fix) {
> >> +                                               fix_delete_line($fixlinenr, $rawline);
> >> +                                       }
> >> +                               }
> >> +                               else {
> >> +                                       if (WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
> >> +                                               "Non-standard signature: $sign_off. Please use '$suggested_signature' instead. $rationale\n" . $herecurr) &&
> >> +                                       $fix) {
> >> +                                               $fixed[$fixlinenr] =~ s/$sign_off/$suggested_signature/;
> >> +                                       }
> >> +                               }
> >>                         }
> >>                         if (defined $space_before && $space_before ne "") {
> >>                                 if (WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
> >> --
> >> 2.17.1
> >>
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-kernel-mentees mailing list
Linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-kernel-mentees

  reply	other threads:[~2020-11-23 15:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-11 14:13 [Linux-kernel-mentees] Fix for BAD_SIGN_OFF: non-standard signature Aditya
2020-11-11 20:04 ` Lukas Bulwahn
2020-11-13 14:35   ` Aditya
2020-11-13 15:00     ` Aditya
2020-11-13 15:26       ` Lukas Bulwahn
2020-11-13 18:25         ` Aditya
2020-11-17 18:03           ` Aditya
2020-11-17 17:42             ` Lukas Bulwahn
2020-11-17 20:54               ` Aditya
2020-11-18 10:12                 ` Aditya
2020-11-18 19:17                   ` Lukas Bulwahn
2020-11-19  5:53                   ` Lukas Bulwahn
2020-11-19 14:09                     ` Aditya
2020-11-20 19:58                       ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH] checkpatch: add fix and improve warning msg for Non-standard signature Aditya Srivastava
2020-11-20 20:03                         ` Aditya
2020-11-20 20:23                           ` Lukas Bulwahn
2020-11-20 21:30                             ` Aditya
2020-11-21  4:58                               ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v2] " Aditya Srivastava
2020-11-21  9:52                                 ` Lukas Bulwahn
2020-11-23 12:21                                   ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v3] " Aditya Srivastava
2020-11-23 13:09                                     ` Lukas Bulwahn
2020-11-23 15:16                                       ` Aditya
2020-11-23 15:18                                         ` Lukas Bulwahn [this message]
2020-11-23 15:04 Aditya Srivastava
2020-11-23 15:16 ` Lukas Bulwahn
2020-11-25  6:57 [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v2] " Lukas Bulwahn
2020-11-25 11:25 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v3] " Aditya Srivastava
2020-11-25 12:26   ` Lukas Bulwahn

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=CAKXUXMzrBxw-Uryq04ByQ9bmS5-jyqGu18MpFNn2gPY0XeF1oQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=yashsri421@gmail.com \
    /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: link
Be 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.