linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: allow tags between co-developed-by and their sign-off

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]

Date:   Mon, 23 Oct 2023 11:24:49 +0200
From:   Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
        Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@...il.com>,
        Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>
CC:     Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: allow tags between co-developed-by and their
 sign-off

On 10/21/23 00:34, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2023-10-20 at 15:21 +0200, Przemek Kitszel wrote:
>> Allow additional tags between Co-developed-by: and Signed-off-by:.
>> Bump severity of missing SoB to ERROR.
>>
>> Additional tags between Co-developed-by and corresponding Signed-off-by
>> could include Reviewed-by tags collected by Submitter, which is also
>> a Co-developer, but should sign-off at the very end of tags provided by
>> themself.
>>
>> Missing SoB is promoted to error while that piece of code is touched.
>>
>> Two sets of perl %hashes introduced to keep both (int) line numbers and
>> (string) messages handy for warning reporting, while keeping it correct
>> across 100+ line long commit messages.
>>
>> Mateusz Polchlopek <mateusz.polchlopek@...el.com> has reported this to me.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
> 
> Unless this is accepted by various process folk,
> and the documentation for it updated, I think this
> should not be applied.

I will post v2 with docs updated. Would make it clear in commit message
that immediateness of SoB after CdB was important for humans checking
presence of both manually, and checkpatch has adopted such requirement
for it's own comfort.