From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 963A3C4363D for ; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 07:20:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E739320759 for ; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 07:20:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="lQtNgRRC" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E739320759 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-mentees-bounces@lists.linuxfoundation.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A6D687575; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 07:20:43 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0YdlaKrjG6IA; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 07:20:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.linuxfoundation.org (lf-lists.osuosl.org [140.211.9.56]) by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87D2187573; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 07:20:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lf-lists.osuosl.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71AF2C0889; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 07:20:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from silver.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE700C0051 for ; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 07:20:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by silver.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8822F203DB for ; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 07:20:41 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from silver.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kwqOJRMQIFJQ for ; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 07:20:40 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-ej1-f45.google.com (mail-ej1-f45.google.com [209.85.218.45]) by silver.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E130B203D2 for ; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 07:20:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ej1-f45.google.com with SMTP id gr14so2286961ejb.1 for ; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 00:20:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references :user-agent:mime-version; bh=BIYPSauCXrdJ/NTcI960cU8GQNVwIJtGlv//g+Sgg+o=; b=lQtNgRRCNIjAPGnDt9NybVpJt3M0sIuTf3GP7u4QbSsIpqsh5xL3EOLZ6qAwVHwxY2 /g+cQ6o0tFWOC0DB/5JAI7DXSu6EiTfHbCEcbbadQEysxbNImEVaWQaZfW/SndrFbkz/ naetI0uvrk7P9OmFGFd/zGvXMxEkCRqV5gNd46gNrOsq2IUj4DJiZ75iMSAUWidlxs7l Im9V7MBUaycgz53SoISubyO0uPlP02FnanVlGloiOib7UlGElUscy3eMwHGJ2dTqiW3h qO9+wJVImGPBXuzbooSTdIX0V9jaHihpp8J83Uj3mBH4gmfcO2u6+El9BLt3aDMOq4e7 qutQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version; bh=BIYPSauCXrdJ/NTcI960cU8GQNVwIJtGlv//g+Sgg+o=; b=aDf5YSUx3+tytJCHpa4uoSi/SFO17SEGKS56BLvDZyW6XRKS/ylQe2pOfdhhXXDCS2 cHM2Jm8eZsfLFHueAAofs5SYpLKU514Fr7v9Qd+0o8HQlBCvC5tPtHV/PBX7xv8Kv73q n+2W++lit5LXKnqm92bPMov7kz0LAqQbV0jR1w37ovoL1aDl/e/d/dklI4LR826YAnmS SJfllc06dYfxqnr+RDgRlnaJvhIf7ZoDOl2fBb4Eu+jkcBi9ecR/Cy5O7c2f2/iPLcAM y9CKUHwAqWAi/iOZafgrDO3vo7Pqygr+XtERcyEtNIrQQLAPnv4/yxChIzM6E8tW8yTS lNmA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531nUKRvGCZogzfrdut5BvQ+v4jMR/NkZmthdmqlyhkCrjrBFU5P NfSVXzONLD0O+hZtcsJPytg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyd1LOCicyRXlC5gTUmOXF/aLIMe0RTLAubHFVReaK3pxmdR9EkXPw69X1cs3gOL4HfR3w4eQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:2173:: with SMTP id rl19mr1348369ejb.514.1601018438246; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 00:20:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from felia ([2001:16b8:2dc8:d00:2cef:8073:5504:c57f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j18sm1226427edj.62.2020.09.25.00.20.37 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 25 Sep 2020 00:20:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Lukas Bulwahn X-Google-Original-From: Lukas Bulwahn Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 09:20:00 +0200 (CEST) X-X-Sender: lukas@felia To: Dwaipayan Ray In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="8323329-531631132-1601018437=:5992" Cc: linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Linux-kernel-mentees] checkpatch.pl investigation: NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF issues X-BeenThere: linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: linux-kernel-mentees-bounces@lists.linuxfoundation.org Sender: "Linux-kernel-mentees" This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323329-531631132-1601018437=:5992 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Fri, 25 Sep 2020, Dwaipayan Ray wrote: > Hi, > As Joe mentioned earlier, there might be four new > warnings to handle better: > > 1) Same name, different address > 2) Same address, different name > 3) email extensions present in header but > not in signed off by > 4) comment blocks after name > > I am thinking to solve the first three in a single patch. > > As for the email extensions part, should it be handled > differently? There will be redundant calls to that > though because it's not an error seen quite often. > Dwaipayan, thanks for this initial structuring. Let us try to put some systematic structure into this handling of the NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF. There are basically two aspects to consider: - which classes are potential mismatches can we potentially observe? - which level of severity do we assign to each class of mismatch? To the first point, you started with some initial classes above. 0) same name, same address (no mismatch) 1) same name, different address subclasses: (how 'different' address?) - email address differ by valid difference, e.g., extensions that will go to the same inbox, e.g., the xyz+fds extension in mail addresses. (that is your class 3, right?) - two email addresses that are known to belong to the same individual - known because of .mailmap - known otherwise? 2) different name, same address subclasses: (how 'different' name?) - examples: - Firstname, Lastname (but middle-name initials differ) - special "regional" characters, like ΓΌ vs. ue, etc. - firstname and lastname are reverted etc. 3) different name, different address (but still we believe it "matches") combinations of subclasses of 1) and 2), which we want to consider. Then, to the second question: So, these different classes we can think of and "assign" different severities that checkpatch.pl can use. Checkpatch.pl already has four levels: three severity reporting levels: ERROR, WARN, CHECK, and the level _do not report_ (which is implemented by just ignoring some kind of difference). I think a lot of discussion will be around what severity to assign to which class above, and in some way, long-term maintainers have a larger say than we do here. So, let us first modify checkpatch.pl to identify the various classes above, maybe just starting very basic, with different name, same address and same name, different address and run it over the commit range and see which examples show up and how often. For now, we first just use checkpatch.pl to identify the different types and refine them into subclasses; then, we can discuss with severity should be assigned to which type of mismatch. The second question should not invalidate our data collection and identification of subclasses, though. Does that help? What do you think? Lukas --8323329-531631132-1601018437=:5992 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Linux-kernel-mentees mailing list Linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-kernel-mentees --8323329-531631132-1601018437=:5992--