linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 8/8] kbuild, PCI: microchip: comment out MODULE

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: <87ilg5mq0r.fsf@meer.lwn.net>
Date:   Mon, 13 Feb 2023 10:30:44 -0700
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
        Nick Alcock <nick.alcock@...cle.com>
Cc:     Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>, mcgrof@...nel.org,
        linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] kbuild, PCI: microchip: comment out MODULE_LICENSE
 in non-modules

Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org> writes:

> It looks odd to me too. Please add SPDX tag in modules which don't have
> it already, instead of commenting code.

So I'm just a bystander here and should probably be ignored, but ...

>From what I can see, Nick is attempting one of those cross-tree cleanups
that's painful enough to do on its own.  This request is asking him to
perform a different, unrelated, and potentially fraught cleanup that the
maintainers of the code in question have not yet managed to get around
to taking care of.  This will impede an already prolonged process and,
IMO, unnecessarily so.

Wouldn't it be better to let this work proceed while making a note
of the files still needing SPDX tags?

I'll shut up now :)

Thanks,

jon