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]

Message-ID: <6b3feb74-5f1d-ee1a-2e1a-8a5f803bed63@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 Nov 2020 08:42:25 +0530
From:   Aditya <yashsri421@...il.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     lukas.bulwahn@...il.com,
        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 23/11/20 11:03 pm, Joe Perches wrote:
> 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.
> 

Hi Joe
Thanks for reviewing. We were also planning to provide fix for certain
non-standard signature warnings due to typo mistake in the signoffs,
using edit distance approach. These signatures were probably not
intended by the user.
E.g. for signatures like: 'Reviwed-by:', 'Singed-off-by:',etc.
Here is the list I have generated for non-standard signatures with
edit distance of 2 or less along with their count (over v4.13..v5.8).
(Among total 539 Non-standard signature warnings, warnings caused by
typo mistakes are 85 in number):

https://github.com/AdityaSrivast/kernel-tasks/blob/master/random/non_standard_signature/less_than2/signs_freq.txt

This is the predicted correct signoffs we are getting (for less than
or equal to 2):
https://github.com/AdityaSrivast/kernel-tasks/blob/master/random/non_standard_signature/less_than_3.txt

The reason I have chosen 2 as threshold is that count 3 onwards, the
results start deviating.
List for edit distance 3:
https://github.com/AdityaSrivast/kernel-tasks/blob/master/random/non_standard_signature/equal_3.txt

What do you think?

Thanks
Aditya