Re: [PATCH 1/1] checkpatch: support "base-commit:" format

[John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>]

On 2/12/20 5:32 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-02-12 at 17:06 -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
>> On Wed, 2020-02-12 at 15:32 -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
>>> In order to support the get-lore-mbox.py tool described in [1], I ran:
>>>
>>>      git format-patch --base=<commit> --cover-letter <revrange>
>>>
>>> ...which generated a "base-commit: <commit-hash>" tag at the end of the
>>> cover letter. However, checkpatch.pl generated an error upon encounting
>>> "base-commit:" in the cover letter:
>>>
>>>      "ERROR: Please use git commit description style..."
>>>
>>> ...because it found the "commit" keyword, and failed to recognize that
>>> it was part of the "base-commit" phrase, and as such, should not be
>>> subjected to the same commit description style rules.
>>>
>>> Update checkpatch.pl to include a special case for "base-commit:", so
>>> that that tag no longer generates a checkpatch error.
> []
>>> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> []
>>> @@ -2761,6 +2761,7 @@ sub process {
>>>   
>>>   # Check for git id commit length and improperly formed commit descriptions
>>>   		if ($in_commit_log && !$commit_log_possible_stack_dump &&
>>> +		    $line !~ /base-commit:/ &&
>>
>> If this base-commit: entry is only at the start of line,


As far as I can tell, we should be able to rely on that, yes.


>> I presume this should actually be
>>
>> 		    $line !~ /^base-commit:/ &&
>> or maybe
>> 		    $line !~ /^\s*base-commit:/ &&
>>
>>>   		    $line !~ /^\s*(?:Link|Patchwork|http|https|BugLink):/i &&
> 
> and probably better to just add it to this line instead like
> 
>   		    $line !~ /^\s*(?:Link|Patchwork|http|https|BugLink|base-commit):/i &&
>  

Yes, that looks nice. I'll send a v2 doing it that way.


thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard
NVIDIA