linux-kernel - Re: [Linux-kernel-mentees] Patches from the future

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: <CABJPP5Dt6KyoaMr-dS9425rozKoCyiPgx9WfoeY2541Aq3MF=w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 1 Feb 2021 22:41:33 +0530
From:   Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@...il.com>
To:     Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Linux-kernel-mentees] Patches from the future - can checkpatch help?

On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 10:20 PM Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 5:37 PM Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 10:04:01PM +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > on linux-next,
> > > $ git log --pretty=format:"%h%x09%ad" | awk '$6>2021 {print $1}'
> > > gives:
> > > 4a2d78822fdf
> > > 12ca45fea91c
> > > 09f2724a786f
> > >
> > > These are patches from the year 2085, 2037 and 2030 respectively.
> > >
> > > Would a checkpatch rule be helpful for these or are they too
> > > isolated to waste runtime on?
> >
> > Dates come from your email client, not the patch itself, how is
> > checkpatch going to catch this?
> >
>
> Dwaipayan, there are two ways:
> - We build a bot listening to mailing lists and check. I like that
> implementation idea for various other checks.
> - Stephen Rothwell could include this as a check on linux-next and
> inform the git author and committer.
>
> I am wondering though if that is worth the effort, three instances of
> a wrong date among 1M commits seems to be very seldom and the harm of
> that mistake is quite small as well.
>

I agree. I felt it was isolated as well but it might affect people who do
static analysis on the commits or such.

The idea of a bot seems nice though in general.
People do have all the style checking scripts at their disposal, but still
we see style issues on the list.

Something similar to the kernel test robot, but for style issues seems nice.
Is it something the community would like?

Thanks,
Dwaipayan.