linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] checkpatch: add fix and improve warning msg for Non-standard signature

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:   Mon, 23 Nov 2020 09:33:29 -0800
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Aditya Srivastava <yashsri421@...il.com>, lukas.bulwahn@...il.com
Cc:     linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] checkpatch: add fix and improve warning msg for
 Non-standard signature

On Mon, 2020-11-23 at 22:54 +0530, Aditya Srivastava wrote:
> Currently, checkpatch.pl warns for BAD_SIGN_OFF on non-standard signature
> styles.

I think this proposed change is unnecessary.
 
> 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:

Standards are useful, but standards are not constraints.

> 1) Requested-by (count: 48) => Suggested-by
> Rationale: In an open-source project, there are no 'requests', just
> 'suggestions' to convince a maintainer to accept your patch

There's nothing really wrong with some non-standard signatures.
And I think leaving humor like brown-paper-bag-by: is useful.

Just telling people that they are using a non-standard signature
I think is enough.