linux-kernel - Re: checkpatch: support deprecated terms checking

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 28 Jul 2020 08:22:49 +0200
From:   SeongJae Park <sjpark@...zon.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
CC:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        SeongJae Park <sjpark@...zon.com>,
        Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>,
        SeongJae Park <sj38.park@...il.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <apw@...onical.com>,
        <colin.king@...onical.com>, <jslaby@...e.cz>, <pavel@....cz>,
        SeongJae Park <sjpark@...zon.de>, <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        <corbet@....net>, <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <mishi@...ux.com>,
        <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: checkpatch: support deprecated terms checking

On Mon, 27 Jul 2020 13:49:00 -0700 Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 2020-07-27 at 13:44 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Jul 2020 08:54:41 +0200 SeongJae Park <sjpark@...zon.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > > > > Unfortunately, the inexperienced _do_ in fact run
> > > > > > checkpatch on files and submit inappropriate patches.
> > 
> > I don't think I really agree with the "new code only" guideline (where
> > did this come from, anyway?).  10 years from now any remaining pre-2020
> > terms will look exceedingly archaic and will get converted at some
> > point.
> > 
> > Wouldn't be longterm realistic to just bite the bullet now and add these
> > conversions to the various todo lists?
> 
> I don't think so.
> 
> There's no exclusion list for existing uses
> written to external specification.
> 
> It's just emitting effectively noisy warnings
> on things that should not be changed.
> 

Just noticed that this patchset and the followup[1] for sync with inclusive
terms commit[2] are dropped from -mm tree.  I admit it could generate some
false positive warnings, though my followup patch[3] makes the message noisy
but gives clear references.

I still believe it's better to provide the messages, but I also know people
could think differently.  After all, the biggest part of the initial goal of
this patches is already made by the inclusive terms commit[2].  So, I would
respect the decision.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200713071912.24432-1-sjpark@amazon.com/
[2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst?id=a5f526ecb075a08c4a082355020166c7fe13ae27
[3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200726180748.29924-1-sj38.park@gmail.com/


Thanks,
SeongJae Park