* [PATCH RFC] checkpatch: add new warnings to author signoff checks.
@ 2020-10-05 6:48 Dwaipayan Ray
2020-10-05 7:18 ` Joe Perches
2020-10-05 7:30 ` Lukas Bulwahn
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Dwaipayan Ray @ 2020-10-05 6:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: joe; +Cc: linux-kernel-mentees, dwaipayanray1, lukas.bulwahn, linux-kernel
The author signed-off-by checks are currently very vague.
Cases like same name or same address are not handled separately.
For example, running checkpatch on commit be6577af0cef
("parisc: Add atomic64_set_release() define to avoid CPU soft lockups"),
gives:
WARNING: Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal patch author
'John David Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net>'
The signoff line was:
"Signed-off-by: Dave Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net>"
Clearly the author has signed off but with a slightly different version
of his name. A more appropriate warning would have been to point out
at the name mismatch instead.
Introduced three new types of warnings:
1) Address matches, but names are different.
"James Watson <james@gmail.com>", "James <james@gmail.com>"
2) Name matches, but addresses are different.
"James Watson <james@watson.com>", "James Watson <james@gmail.com>"
3) Name matches, but addresses without mail extensions are same.
"James Watson <james@gmail.com>", "James Watson <james+a@gmail.com>"
For the 3rd class, a --strict check message is generated, and for the
other two, warnings are generated.
Signed-off-by: Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@gmail.com>
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 57 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 31624bbb342e..80feb15f93cb 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -2347,6 +2347,7 @@ sub process {
my $signoff = 0;
my $author = '';
my $authorsignoff = 0;
+ my $authorsignoff_ctx = '';
my $is_patch = 0;
my $is_binding_patch = -1;
my $in_header_lines = $file ? 0 : 1;
@@ -2674,9 +2675,34 @@ sub process {
if ($line =~ /^\s*signed-off-by:\s*(.*)/i) {
$signoff++;
$in_commit_log = 0;
- if ($author ne '') {
+ if ($author ne '' && $authorsignoff != 1) {
if (same_email_addresses($1, $author)) {
$authorsignoff = 1;
+ } else {
+ my $ctx = $1;
+ my ($email_name, $email_comment, $email_address, $comment1) = parse_email($ctx);
+ my ($author_name, $author_comment, $author_address, $comment2) = parse_email($author);
+
+ if($email_address eq $author_address) {
+ $authorsignoff_ctx = $ctx;
+ $authorsignoff = 2;
+ } elsif ($email_name eq $author_name) {
+ $authorsignoff_ctx = $ctx;
+ $authorsignoff = 3;
+
+ my $address1 = $email_address;
+ my $address2 = $author_address;
+
+ if ($address1 =~ /(\S+)\+\S+(\@.*)/) {
+ $address1 = $1.$2;
+ }
+ if ($address2 =~ /(\S+)\+\S+(\@.*)/) {
+ $address2 = $1.$2;
+ }
+ if($address1 eq $address2) {
+ $authorsignoff = 4;
+ }
+ }
}
}
}
@@ -6891,9 +6917,32 @@ sub process {
if ($signoff == 0) {
ERROR("MISSING_SIGN_OFF",
"Missing Signed-off-by: line(s)\n");
- } elsif (!$authorsignoff) {
- WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
- "Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal patch author '$author'\n");
+ } elsif ($authorsignoff != 1) {
+ # authorsignoff values:
+ # 0 -> missing sign off
+ # 1 -> sign off present
+ # 2 -> address matches, name different
+ # 3 -> name matches, address different
+ # 4 -> name matches, address matches without extension
+
+ my $ctx_msg = "'Signed-off-by: $authorsignoff_ctx' should be:\n'Signed-off-by: $author'";
+
+ if($authorsignoff == 0) {
+ WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
+ "Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal patch author '$author'\n");
+ }
+ elsif($authorsignoff == 2) {
+ WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
+ "Author name mismatch:\n$ctx_msg\n");
+ }
+ elsif($authorsignoff == 3) {
+ WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
+ "Author address mismatch:\n$ctx_msg\n");
+ }
+ elsif($authorsignoff == 4) {
+ CHK("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
+ "Author mail extension mismatch:\n$ctx_msg\n");
+ }
}
}
--
2.27.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH RFC] checkpatch: add new warnings to author signoff checks.
2020-10-05 6:48 [PATCH RFC] checkpatch: add new warnings to author signoff checks Dwaipayan Ray
@ 2020-10-05 7:18 ` Joe Perches
2020-10-05 7:40 ` Dwaipayan Ray
2020-10-05 7:30 ` Lukas Bulwahn
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Joe Perches @ 2020-10-05 7:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dwaipayan Ray; +Cc: linux-kernel-mentees, lukas.bulwahn, linux-kernel
On Mon, 2020-10-05 at 12:18 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> The author signed-off-by checks are currently very vague.
> Cases like same name or same address are not handled separately.
>
> For example, running checkpatch on commit be6577af0cef
> ("parisc: Add atomic64_set_release() define to avoid CPU soft lockups"),
> gives:
>
> WARNING: Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal patch author
> 'John David Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net>'
>
> The signoff line was:
> "Signed-off-by: Dave Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net>"
>
> Clearly the author has signed off but with a slightly different version
> of his name. A more appropriate warning would have been to point out
> at the name mismatch instead.
>
> Introduced three new types of warnings:
>
> 1) Address matches, but names are different.
> "James Watson <james@gmail.com>", "James <james@gmail.com>"
>
> 2) Name matches, but addresses are different.
> "James Watson <james@watson.com>", "James Watson <james@gmail.com>"
>
> 3) Name matches, but addresses without mail extensions are same.
> "James Watson <james@gmail.com>", "James Watson <james+a@gmail.com>"
>
> For the 3rd class, a --strict check message is generated, and for the
> other two, warnings are generated.
I don't have any issue with the concept, but please
be consistent with spacing after if tests.
Always use a single space after if
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> @@ -2347,6 +2347,7 @@ sub process {
> my $signoff = 0;
> my $author = '';
> my $authorsignoff = 0;
> + my $authorsignoff_ctx = '';
ctx isn't a descriptive name.
Maybe $author_sob
> @@ -2674,9 +2675,34 @@ sub process {
> if ($line =~ /^\s*signed-off-by:\s*(.*)/i) {
> $signoff++;
> $in_commit_log = 0;
> - if ($author ne '') {
> + if ($author ne '' && $authorsignoff != 1) {
Has space after if
> if (same_email_addresses($1, $author)) {
> $authorsignoff = 1;
> + } else {
> + my $ctx = $1;
> + my ($email_name, $email_comment, $email_address, $comment1) = parse_email($ctx);
> + my ($author_name, $author_comment, $author_address, $comment2) = parse_email($author);
> +
> + if($email_address eq $author_address) {
No space after if, etc...
> @@ -6891,9 +6917,32 @@ sub process {
> if ($signoff == 0) {
> ERROR("MISSING_SIGN_OFF",
> "Missing Signed-off-by: line(s)\n");
> - } elsif (!$authorsignoff) {
> - WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
> - "Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal patch author '$author'\n");
> + } elsif ($authorsignoff != 1) {
> + # authorsignoff values:
> + # 0 -> missing sign off
> + # 1 -> sign off present
sign off identical
> + # 2 -> address matches, name different
> + # 3 -> name matches, address different
> + # 4 -> name matches, address matches without extension
extension here isn't obvious
> +
> + my $ctx_msg = "'Signed-off-by: $authorsignoff_ctx' should be:\n'Signed-off-by: $author'";
New line not necessary or useful really.
And for mismatches, it's really not known that
it should be one way or the or the other is it?
> +
> + if($authorsignoff == 0) {
> + WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
> + "Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal patch author '$author'\n");
> + }
> + elsif($authorsignoff == 2) {
> + WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
> + "Author name mismatch:\n$ctx_msg\n");
> + }
> + elsif($authorsignoff == 3) {
> + WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
> + "Author address mismatch:\n$ctx_msg\n");
> + }
> + elsif($authorsignoff == 4) {
> + CHK("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
> + "Author mail extension mismatch:\n$ctx_msg\n");
> + }
> }
> }
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH RFC] checkpatch: add new warnings to author signoff checks.
2020-10-05 7:18 ` Joe Perches
@ 2020-10-05 7:40 ` Dwaipayan Ray
2020-10-05 8:05 ` Joe Perches
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Dwaipayan Ray @ 2020-10-05 7:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joe Perches; +Cc: linux-kernel-mentees, Lukas Bulwahn, linux-kernel
On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 12:48 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2020-10-05 at 12:18 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> > The author signed-off-by checks are currently very vague.
> > Cases like same name or same address are not handled separately.
> >
> > For example, running checkpatch on commit be6577af0cef
> > ("parisc: Add atomic64_set_release() define to avoid CPU soft lockups"),
> > gives:
> >
> > WARNING: Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal patch author
> > 'John David Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net>'
> >
> > The signoff line was:
> > "Signed-off-by: Dave Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net>"
> >
> > Clearly the author has signed off but with a slightly different version
> > of his name. A more appropriate warning would have been to point out
> > at the name mismatch instead.
> >
> > Introduced three new types of warnings:
> >
> > 1) Address matches, but names are different.
> > "James Watson <james@gmail.com>", "James <james@gmail.com>"
> >
> > 2) Name matches, but addresses are different.
> > "James Watson <james@watson.com>", "James Watson <james@gmail.com>"
> >
> > 3) Name matches, but addresses without mail extensions are same.
> > "James Watson <james@gmail.com>", "James Watson <james+a@gmail.com>"
> >
> > For the 3rd class, a --strict check message is generated, and for the
> > other two, warnings are generated.
>
> I don't have any issue with the concept, but please
> be consistent with spacing after if tests.
>
> Always use a single space after if
>
Okay sure I will take care of that.
> > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>
> > @@ -2347,6 +2347,7 @@ sub process {
> > my $signoff = 0;
> > my $author = '';
> > my $authorsignoff = 0;
> > + my $authorsignoff_ctx = '';
>
> ctx isn't a descriptive name.
>
> Maybe $author_sob
Yes that's more illustrative. I will change that.
>
> > @@ -2674,9 +2675,34 @@ sub process {
> > if ($line =~ /^\s*signed-off-by:\s*(.*)/i) {
> > $signoff++;
> > $in_commit_log = 0;
> > - if ($author ne '') {
> > + if ($author ne '' && $authorsignoff != 1) {
>
> Has space after if
>
> > if (same_email_addresses($1, $author)) {
> > $authorsignoff = 1;
> > + } else {
> > + my $ctx = $1;
> > + my ($email_name, $email_comment, $email_address, $comment1) = parse_email($ctx);
> > + my ($author_name, $author_comment, $author_address, $comment2) = parse_email($author);
> > +
> > + if($email_address eq $author_address) {
>
> No space after if, etc...
>
> > @@ -6891,9 +6917,32 @@ sub process {
> > if ($signoff == 0) {
> > ERROR("MISSING_SIGN_OFF",
> > "Missing Signed-off-by: line(s)\n");
> > - } elsif (!$authorsignoff) {
> > - WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
> > - "Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal patch author '$author'\n");
> > + } elsif ($authorsignoff != 1) {
> > + # authorsignoff values:
> > + # 0 -> missing sign off
> > + # 1 -> sign off present
>
> sign off identical
>
> > + # 2 -> address matches, name different
> > + # 3 -> name matches, address different
> > + # 4 -> name matches, address matches without extension
>
> extension here isn't obvious
Yeah I was thinking of that. I was a bit confused about the message.
Will it be better as "address excluding mail extensions matches"?
>
> > +
> > + my $ctx_msg = "'Signed-off-by: $authorsignoff_ctx' should be:\n'Signed-off-by: $author'";
>
> New line not necessary or useful really.
>
> And for mismatches, it's really not known that
> it should be one way or the or the other is it?
>
I think that's true. But since the mail in the
From: part is the one which with others are being
compared, I think maybe it should have the higher
priority, and be treated as the expected one.
Otherwise I could change the message accordingly.
> > +
> > + if($authorsignoff == 0) {
> > + WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
> > + "Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal patch author '$author'\n");
> > + }
> > + elsif($authorsignoff == 2) {
> > + WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
> > + "Author name mismatch:\n$ctx_msg\n");
> > + }
> > + elsif($authorsignoff == 3) {
> > + WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
> > + "Author address mismatch:\n$ctx_msg\n");
> > + }
> > + elsif($authorsignoff == 4) {
> > + CHK("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
> > + "Author mail extension mismatch:\n$ctx_msg\n");
> > + }
> > }
> > }
> >
>
Thanks,
Dwaipayan.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH RFC] checkpatch: add new warnings to author signoff checks.
2020-10-05 7:40 ` Dwaipayan Ray
@ 2020-10-05 8:05 ` Joe Perches
[not found] ` <CABJPP5CAY+qJU8wnGZ7JgugeN9CyFbdct6nAsxpY0NdyaNuWLQ@mail.gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Joe Perches @ 2020-10-05 8:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dwaipayan Ray; +Cc: linux-kernel-mentees, Lukas Bulwahn, linux-kernel
On Mon, 2020-10-05 at 13:10 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 12:48 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2020-10-05 at 12:18 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> > > The author signed-off-by checks are currently very vague.
> > > Cases like same name or same address are not handled separately.
[]
> > And for mismatches, it's really not known that
> > it should be one way or the or the other is it?
> >
>
> I think that's true. But since the mail in the
> From: part is the one which with others are being
> compared, I think maybe it should have the higher
> priority, and be treated as the expected one.
I rather expect it to be the other way around.
The Signed-off-by: line should be authoritative
as that is what is put in the commit log.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH RFC] checkpatch: add new warnings to author signoff checks.
2020-10-05 6:48 [PATCH RFC] checkpatch: add new warnings to author signoff checks Dwaipayan Ray
2020-10-05 7:18 ` Joe Perches
@ 2020-10-05 7:30 ` Lukas Bulwahn
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Lukas Bulwahn @ 2020-10-05 7:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dwaipayan Ray; +Cc: joe, linux-kernel-mentees, lukas.bulwahn, linux-kernel
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> The author signed-off-by checks are currently very vague.
> Cases like same name or same address are not handled separately.
>
> For example, running checkpatch on commit be6577af0cef
> ("parisc: Add atomic64_set_release() define to avoid CPU soft lockups"),
> gives:
>
> WARNING: Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal patch author
> 'John David Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net>'
>
> The signoff line was:
> "Signed-off-by: Dave Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net>"
>
> Clearly the author has signed off but with a slightly different version
> of his name. A more appropriate warning would have been to point out
> at the name mismatch instead.
>
> Introduced three new types of warnings:
>
> 1) Address matches, but names are different.
> "James Watson <james@gmail.com>", "James <james@gmail.com>"
>
> 2) Name matches, but addresses are different.
> "James Watson <james@watson.com>", "James Watson <james@gmail.com>"
>
> 3) Name matches, but addresses without mail extensions are same.
> "James Watson <james@gmail.com>", "James Watson <james+a@gmail.com>"
>
> For the 3rd class, a --strict check message is generated, and for the
> other two, warnings are generated.
>
I will start running an evaluation on checkpatch.pl before and after this
patch to get some insight on this change.
> Signed-off-by: Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@gmail.com>
> ---
> scripts/checkpatch.pl | 57 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> index 31624bbb342e..80feb15f93cb 100755
> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> @@ -2347,6 +2347,7 @@ sub process {
> my $signoff = 0;
> my $author = '';
> my $authorsignoff = 0;
> + my $authorsignoff_ctx = '';
> my $is_patch = 0;
> my $is_binding_patch = -1;
> my $in_header_lines = $file ? 0 : 1;
> @@ -2674,9 +2675,34 @@ sub process {
> if ($line =~ /^\s*signed-off-by:\s*(.*)/i) {
> $signoff++;
> $in_commit_log = 0;
> - if ($author ne '') {
> + if ($author ne '' && $authorsignoff != 1) {
> if (same_email_addresses($1, $author)) {
> $authorsignoff = 1;
> + } else {
> + my $ctx = $1;
> + my ($email_name, $email_comment, $email_address, $comment1) = parse_email($ctx);
> + my ($author_name, $author_comment, $author_address, $comment2) = parse_email($author);
> +
> + if($email_address eq $author_address) {
> + $authorsignoff_ctx = $ctx;
> + $authorsignoff = 2;
> + } elsif ($email_name eq $author_name) {
> + $authorsignoff_ctx = $ctx;
> + $authorsignoff = 3;
> +
> + my $address1 = $email_address;
> + my $address2 = $author_address;
> +
> + if ($address1 =~ /(\S+)\+\S+(\@.*)/) {
> + $address1 = $1.$2;
> + }
> + if ($address2 =~ /(\S+)\+\S+(\@.*)/) {
> + $address2 = $1.$2;
> + }
> + if($address1 eq $address2) {
> + $authorsignoff = 4;
> + }
> + }
> }
> }
> }
> @@ -6891,9 +6917,32 @@ sub process {
> if ($signoff == 0) {
> ERROR("MISSING_SIGN_OFF",
> "Missing Signed-off-by: line(s)\n");
> - } elsif (!$authorsignoff) {
> - WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
> - "Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal patch author '$author'\n");
> + } elsif ($authorsignoff != 1) {
> + # authorsignoff values:
> + # 0 -> missing sign off
> + # 1 -> sign off present
> + # 2 -> address matches, name different
> + # 3 -> name matches, address different
> + # 4 -> name matches, address matches without extension
> +
> + my $ctx_msg = "'Signed-off-by: $authorsignoff_ctx' should be:\n'Signed-off-by: $author'";
> +
> + if($authorsignoff == 0) {
> + WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
> + "Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal patch author '$author'\n");
> + }
I think in this case, we could actually turn this into an ERROR; now that
we have the refined cases (2,3,4) on which we would just warn or 'note'
with --strict checks.
Lukas
> + elsif($authorsignoff == 2) {
> + WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
> + "Author name mismatch:\n$ctx_msg\n");
> + }
> + elsif($authorsignoff == 3) {
> + WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
> + "Author address mismatch:\n$ctx_msg\n");
> + }
> + elsif($authorsignoff == 4) {
> + CHK("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF",
> + "Author mail extension mismatch:\n$ctx_msg\n");
> + }
> }
> }
>
> --
> 2.27.0
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-10-05 8:52 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-10-05 6:48 [PATCH RFC] checkpatch: add new warnings to author signoff checks Dwaipayan Ray
2020-10-05 7:18 ` Joe Perches
2020-10-05 7:40 ` Dwaipayan Ray
2020-10-05 8:05 ` Joe Perches
[not found] ` <CABJPP5CAY+qJU8wnGZ7JgugeN9CyFbdct6nAsxpY0NdyaNuWLQ@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <f1536dd1c1fbf53a848b27a2817a973fbf809719.camel@perches.com>
2020-10-05 8:52 ` Dwaipayan Ray
2020-10-05 7:30 ` Lukas Bulwahn
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®