[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e8ad8b03-70c5-03b5-3e48-61bf884ebb27@leemhuis.info>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2023 16:28:08 +0200
From: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
To: Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@...sares.net>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@...il.com>,
Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>,
Kai Wasserbäch <kai@....carbon-project.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@...uxfoundation.org>,
Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, mptcp@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] checkpatch: allow Closes tags with links
On 27.03.23 15:06, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> Hi Thorsten,
>
> On 25/03/2023 07:25, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> On 24.03.23 19:52, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
>>> As a follow-up of the previous patch modifying the documentation to
>>> allow using the "Closes:" tag, checkpatch.pl is updated accordingly.
>>>
>>> checkpatch.pl now mentions the "Closes:" tag between brackets to express
>>> the fact it should be used only if it makes sense.
>>>
>>> While at it, checkpatch.pl will not complain if the "Closes" tag is used
>>> with a "long" line, similar to what is done with the "Link" tag.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> -# check if Reported-by: is followed by a Link:
>>> +# check if Reported-by: is followed by a Link: (or Closes:) tag
>>
>> Small detail: why the parenthesis here? Why no simply "check if
>> Reported-by: is followed by a either Link: or Closes: tag". Same below...
>>
>>> if ($sign_off =~ /^reported(?:|-and-tested)-by:$/i) {
>>> if (!defined $lines[$linenr]) {
>>> WARN("BAD_REPORTED_BY_LINK",
>>> - "Reported-by: should be immediately followed by Link: to the report\n" . $herecurr . $rawlines[$linenr] . "\n");
>>> - } elsif ($rawlines[$linenr] !~ m{^link:\s*https?://}i) {
>>> + "Reported-by: should be immediately followed by Link: (or Closes:) to the report\n" . $herecurr . $rawlines[$linenr] . "\n");
>>
>> ...here, where users actually get to see this and might wonder why it's
>> written like that, without getting any answer.
>
> I tried to explain that in the cover-letter but maybe I should add an
> additional comment in the code: checkpatch.pl now mentions the "Closes:"
> tag between parenthesis to express the fact it should be used only if it
> makes sense. I didn't find any other short ways to express that but I'm
> open to suggestions.
>
> Now as discussed on patch 1/2, if the "Closes:" tag can be used with any
> public link, we should definitively remove the parenthesis here and
> probably below (see "Check for odd tags before a URI/URL") as well.
Well, ymmd, but if we go down that route I'd say this code should
suggest to use "Closes:" all the time (or primarily).
Ciao, Thorsten
Powered by blists - more mailing lists