linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: validate commit tag ordering

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: <45f0995f-17ac-45a3-8bc0-3b276ee91a9d@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2025 14:46:02 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Hendrik Hamerlinck <hendrik.hamerlinck@...mernet.be>,
 dwaipayanray1@...il.com, lukas.bulwahn@...il.com, joe@...ches.com,
 corbet@....net, apw@...onical.com, skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
 linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linux.dev, workflows@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: validate commit tag ordering

On 31/07/2025 13:55, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2025 at 10:42, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
>> On 24/07/2025 09:20, Hendrik Hamerlinck wrote:
>>> Modified the checkpatch script to ensure that commit tags (e.g.,
>>> Signed-off-by, Reviewed-by, Acked-by, Tested-by, etc.) appear in the
>>> correct order according to kernel conventions [1].
>>
>> These are not the conventions I use for my subsystems and ask others to
>> follow, so imposing TIP rules to all maintainers needs broad consensus,
>> not (yet) checkpatch.
>>
>> What's more, I think above TIP rules are contradicting with existing,
>> widely used and approved toolset - b4. So no, if you want universal
>> tool, please use b4 or whatever b4 defines.
> 
> B4 does not follow the proper order:

There is no "proper order" in terms of absolute facts.

>   1. Multiple Reviewed-by tags may be added in a different order
>       than given,

Maybe this could be fixed.

>   2. When applying my own patches, b4 adds the given tags before
>      instead of after my own SoB.

This is working exactly as expected (intentional), explained few times
by Konstantin. Some people of course have different opinion and prefer
different order (I know few subsystems), but majority I think accepted
Konstantin's explanation.

Best regards,
Krzysztof