linux-kernel - Re: Documentation/, SPDX tags, and checkpatch.pl

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <f7ebadf988edddd423187c3a09fcc35bf69b25f6.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Mon, 14 Oct 2019 13:55:41 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Documentation/, SPDX tags, and checkpatch.pl

On Mon, 2019-10-14 at 13:47 -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> When adding a new Documentation/ file, checkpatch.pl is warning me
> that the SPDX tag is missing. Should checkpatch.pl skip those kinds
> of warnings, seeing as how we probably don't intend on putting the
> SPDX tags at the top of the Documentation/*.rst files?
> 
> Or are we, after all? I'm just looking to get to a warnings-free situation 
> here, one way or the other. :)
> 
> The exact warning I'm seeing is:
> 
> WARNING: Missing or malformed SPDX-License-Identifier tag in line 1
> #25: FILE: Documentation/vm/get_user_pages.rst:1:
> +.. _get_user_pages:
> 

Looks like ~18% of the .rst files already have SPDX markers

$ git ls-files -- '*.rst' | wc -l
2125

$ git grep -n "SPDX-License-Identifier:" -- '*.rst'| grep ':1:' | wc -l
378

Likely all .rst files will have these markers eventually.