linux-kernel - Re: [patch V4 01/11] Documentation: Add license-rules.rst to describe how to properly identify file licenses

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 25 Nov 2017 20:17:26 +0100
From:   Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...pensource.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>,
        Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
        Rob Herring <rob.herring@...aro.org>,
        Jonas Oberg <jonas@...e.org>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        linux-xfs <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Charlemagne Lasse <charlemagnelasse@...il.com>,
        Carmen Bianca Bakker <carmenbianca@...e.org>
Subject: Re: [patch V4 01/11] Documentation: Add license-rules.rst to
 describe how to properly identify file licenses

On Sat 2017-11-25 09:11:58, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> wrote:
> >
> > That does not sound like he was deciding between /* */ and //. And
> > actually this was in context of files with no existing license. You
> > made the ugly patches. Stop hiding behind Linus.
> 
> No, Linus happily stands up for //.
> 
> I really don't like one-liner /* */ comments. Let's face it, // was
> the _one_ thing C++ got right, among all the horrible bad decisions.
> 
> I think we should just start moving to // in general, but only when
> adding new ones (ie I don't want to see any automatic conversion
> patches).
> 
> And it's _particularly_ true for the whole case where we mix
> one-liners like the SPDX line with block comments. That's where /* */
> really sucks.

I agree that we should not do

/* SPDX-License-Identifier:     GPL-2.0+ */
/*
 * Driver for SMSC USB3503 USB 2.0 hub controller driver
 *
 * Copyright (c) 2012-2013 Dongjin Kim (tobetter@...il.com)
 */

There's logical place in the comment, and it should look like this:

/*
 * Driver for SMSC USB3503 USB 2.0 hub controller driver
 *
 * SPDX-License-Identifier:     GPL-2.0+
 * Copyright (c) 2012-2013 Dongjin Kim (tobetter@...il.com)
 */

So I'm not saying "use one-line comments with SPDX identifier". I'm
saying place it where people expect it.

Best regards,
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (182 bytes)