| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20201201112931.11192-1-yashsri421@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 16:59:31 +0530
From: Aditya Srivastava <yashsri421@...il.com>
To: joe@...ches.com
Cc: yashsri421@...il.com, lukas.bulwahn@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: [PATCH v5] checkpatch: add fix and improve warning msg for Non-standard signature
Currently, checkpatch.pl warns for BAD_SIGN_OFF on non-standard signature
styles.
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:
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
2) Co-authored-by (count: 43) => Co-developed-by
Rationale: Co-developed-by and Co-authored-by are synonyms
3) Analyzed-by (count: 22) / Analysed-by (count: 5) => Co-developed-by
Rationale: Analyzing is a part of Software Development, so
'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create
code
4) Improvements-by (count: 19) => Co-developed-by
5) Noticed-by (count: 11) => Reported-by
6) Inspired-by (count: 11) => Suggested-by
7) Verified-by (count: 8) => Tested-by
Rationale: Used by a single user. On reading mailing list, it seems
Tested-by might be a suitable alternative
8) Okay-ished-by (count: 8) => Acked-by
Rationale: Used by a single user. On reading mailing list, it seems
Acked-by must be suitable alternative
9) Acked-for-MFD-by (count: 6) => Acked-by
10) Reviewed-off-by (count: 5) => Reviewed-by
11) Proposed-by (count: 5) => Suggested-by
Rationale: On observing the mailing list, this tag is always used for a
maintainer. It seems that the changes might have been suggested by them
and the tag is used as acknowledgment for the same
12) Fixed-by (count: 3) => Co-developed-by
Rationale: Fixing bug is a part of Software Development, so
'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create
code
13) Pointed-out-by (count: 3) / Pointed-at-by (count: 2) => Suggested-by
Rationale: The tags are used for maintainers. It seems that the changes
might have been suggested by them and the tag is used as acknowledgment
for the same
E.g., Pointed-at-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
14) Suggestions-by (count: 3) => Suggested-by
Provide a fix by replacing the non-standard signature with its standard
equivalent.
Also, improve warning messages correspondingly, providing suitable
rationale to the user for the suggestion made.
Signed-off-by: Aditya Srivastava <yashsri421@...il.com>
---
applies on next-20201120 and my last patch at Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel-mentees/db1195235752685fc85fb52ecb1b1af3f35b5394.camel@perches.com/T/#u
changes in v2: replace commit specific example with brief evaluation
changes in v3: provide rationale to users for every signature tag suggestion;
modify commit message describing arrival to conclusion in a structured way
changes in v4: modify rationale for certain suggestions
changes in v5: remove the tag deletion suggestions, ie "Generated-by" and "Celebrated-by"; rebase on last accepted changes; modify commit message
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 73 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 72 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 4a026926139f..d0c2f189272f 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -563,6 +563,72 @@ sub find_standard_signature {
return "";
}
+our %standard_signature_fix = (
+ "Requested-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "In an open-source project, there are no 'requests', just 'suggestions' to convince a maintainer to accept your patch",
+ },
+ "Co-authored-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
+ rationale => "Co-developed-by is the standard signature tag to attribute multiple authors for a patch",
+ },
+ "Analyzed-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
+ rationale => "Analyzing is a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
+ },
+ "Analysed-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
+ rationale => "Analysing is a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
+ },
+ "Improvements-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
+ rationale => "Performing improvements are a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
+ },
+ "Noticed-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Reported-by:",
+ rationale => "Reported-by is the standard signature tag for acknowledging user who noticed or reported any bug(s)",
+ },
+ "Inspired-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "Suggested-by is the standard signature tag for acknowledging user for their suggestions",
+ },
+ "Verified-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Tested-by:",
+ rationale => "Tested-by is the standard signature tag to attribute user for verifying/testing the patch",
+ },
+ "Okay-ished-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Acked-by:",
+ rationale => "Acked-by is the standard signature tag for recording one's approval",
+ },
+ "Acked-for-MFD-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Acked-by:",
+ rationale => "Acked-by is the standard signature tag for recording one's approval",
+ },
+ "Reviewed-off-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Reviewed-by:",
+ rationale => "Reviewed-by is the standard signature tag to indicate that the patch has been reviewed",
+ },
+ "Proposed-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "Suggested-by is the standard signature tag for acknowledging user for their suggestions",
+ },
+ "Fixed-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
+ rationale => "Fixing bug is a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
+ },
+ "Pointed-out-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "Pointing out certain changes is synonymous to suggesting changes, so Suggested-by seems perfectly fine",
+ },
+ "Pointed-at-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "Pointing at certain changes is synonymous to suggesting changes, so Suggested-by seems perfectly fine",
+ },
+ "Suggestions-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "Suggested-by is the standard signature tag for acknowledging user for their suggestions",
+ },
+);
our @typeListMisordered = (
qr{char\s+(?:un)?signed},
@@ -2832,12 +2898,17 @@ sub process {
if ($sign_off !~ /$signature_tags/) {
my $suggested_signature = find_standard_signature($sign_off);
+ my $rationale = "";
+ if (exists($standard_signature_fix{$sign_off})) {
+ $suggested_signature = $standard_signature_fix{$sign_off}{'suggestion'};
+ $rationale = $standard_signature_fix{$sign_off}{'rationale'};
+ }
if ($suggested_signature eq "") {
WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
"Non-standard signature: $sign_off\n" . $herecurr);
} else {
if (WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
- "Non-standard signature: '$sign_off' - perhaps '$suggested_signature'?\n" . $herecurr) &&
+ "Non-standard signature: '$sign_off' - perhaps '$suggested_signature'? $rationale\n" . $herecurr) &&
$fix) {
$fixed[$fixlinenr] =~ s/$sign_off/$suggested_signature/;
}
--
2.17.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists