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: <CAKXUXMzcMWeM2M81b2PZ+D54LO6xd+m667vygWVF93Mnsq8QQg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 Nov 2020 07:54:13 +0100
From:   Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     Aditya Srivastava <yashsri421@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] checkpatch: add fix and improve warning msg for
 Non-standard signature

On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 6:33 PM Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> 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.
>

Agree, but we do try to create statistics and try to derive quality
statements from those tags (yes, empirical software engineering black
magic...).
Hence, I am in favor of suggesting to rewrite those tags that really
do not add anything at all. E.g., Suggestions-by: vs. Suggested-by, or
Coauthored-by vs. Co-developed-by.

Anyone can ignore checkpatch; so it is not a constraint unless
enforced by subsystem maintainers.

> > 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.
>

I think we do not want to take the humor and fun away from patches.

So let us not suggest deleting the humorous and celebrating ones.

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

Maybe a patch reduced to the very obvious synonyms helps newcomers or
people with lousy memory to be reminded that it is called
"Co-developed-by:" not "Co-authored-by".

Lukas