linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Aditya Srivastava <yashsri421@gmail.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] checkpatch: add fix and improve warning msg for Non-standard signature
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 19:21:39 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKXUXMx8RURmeyzp5Ak7_409oaVJo622ndpC5VceN-C_f-HPdg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f4392362e682ce7a02eee8a2036e1035342a0b4f.camel@perches.com>

On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 6:24 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2020-12-01 at 16:59 +0530, Aditya Srivastava 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:
>
> I'm not a fan of this patch.
>
> There is already a "non-standard" signature warning for
> all of these cases since 2012, predating the range of this
> retrospective evaluation by over 5 years and yet these
> existing commits have been accepted.
>
> The value in actual standardization and effectively
> requiring specific signature style tags is quite low.
>
> Anyone that signed a thing a particular way should be free
> to sign the thing as they choose.
>
> Most of these warnings would also still be in the tree in
> the future in new patches as running checkpatch without
> it emitting a message of any type isn't a requirement nor
> should checkpatch use actually be required workflow.
>

Can we scale this fixing feature down to the very obvious synonyms
that simply do not add anything but confusion?

Such as for those four here:

Co-authored-by (count: 43) => Co-developed-by
Reviewed-off-by (count: 5) => Reviewed-by
Proposed-by (count: 5) => Suggested-by
Suggestions-by (count: 3) => Suggested-by

Then, we can probably also drop the rationale because it is pretty clear.

Of course, the impact might be really zero, given that it is unclear
if those authors did actually ever run checkpatch in the first place.

Joe, if you see no value in even such a minimal fix feature, let us
drop that idea and move on. There are enough other things to work on.

Lukas

  reply	other threads:[~2020-12-01 18:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-12-01 11:29 [PATCH v5] checkpatch: add fix and improve warning msg for Non-standard signature Aditya Srivastava
2020-12-01 17:24 ` Joe Perches
2020-12-01 18:21   ` Lukas Bulwahn [this message]
2020-12-01 18:39     ` Joe Perches
2020-12-02  9:08       ` [PATCH] checkpatch: add fix for non-standard signature - co-authored-by Aditya Srivastava
2020-12-02 17:16         ` Joe Perches
2020-12-02 18:30           ` [PATCH -mmots] " Aditya Srivastava
2020-12-02 18:56             ` Joe Perches
2020-12-03  9:59               ` Aditya
2020-12-03 10:59                 ` Lukas Bulwahn
2020-12-03 12:23                   ` Aditya
2020-12-03 18:57                   ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] " Greg KH
2020-12-03 19:00                     ` Lukas Bulwahn
2020-12-03 19:25                       ` Greg KH
2020-12-03 19:31                         ` Joe Perches
2020-12-04 14:40                 ` [PATCH v6] " Aditya Srivastava
2020-12-04 15:59                   ` Joe Perches
2020-12-05 10:22                   ` Aditya
2020-12-05 12:03                     ` Joe Perches
2020-12-05 12:55                       ` Aditya
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-11-28 15:40 [PATCH v4] checkpatch: add fix and improve warning msg for non-standard signature Joe Perches
2020-11-28 18:35 ` [PATCH v5] " Aditya Srivastava
2020-11-28 19:12   ` Joe Perches

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=CAKXUXMx8RURmeyzp5Ak7_409oaVJo622ndpC5VceN-C_f-HPdg@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com \
    --cc=joe@perches.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).