Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] checkpatch: add fix option for MISSING_SIGN_OFF | From | Aditya <> | Date | Wed, 18 Nov 2020 02:02:14 +0530 |
| |
On 11/11/20 9:20 pm, Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2020-11-11 at 16:39 +0530, Aditya wrote: >> On 11/11/20 4:00 pm, Lukas Bulwahn wrote: >>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 10:01 AM Aditya Srivastava <yashsri421@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Currently checkpatch warns us if there is no 'Signed-off-by' line >>>> for the patch. >>>> >>>> E.g., running checkpatch on commit 9ac060a708e0 ("leaking_addresses: >>>> Completely remove --version flag") reports this error: >>>> >>>> ERROR: Missing Signed-off-by: line(s) >>>> >>>> Provide a fix by adding a Signed-off-by line corresponding to the author >>>> of the patch before the patch separator line. Also avoid this error for >>>> the commits where some typo is present in the sign off. > [] >>> I think it should still warn about a Missing Signed-off-by: even when >>> we know there is a $non_standard_signature. So, checkpatch simply >>> emits two warnings; that is okay in that case. >>> >>> It is just that our evaluation shows that the provided fix option >>> should not be suggested when there is a $non_standard_signature >>> because we actually would predict that there is typo in the intended >>> Signed-off-by tag and the fix that checkpatch would suggest would not >>> be adequate. >>> >>> Joe, what is your opinion? >>> >>> Aditya, it should not be too difficult to implement the rule that way, right? >>> >> >> No, I'd probably just have to add the check with $fix, instead of with >> $signoff > > I think it does not matter much which is chosen. > > The bad signed-off-by: line would still need to be corrected one > way or another and the added signed-off-line is also possibly > incorrect so it could need to be modified or deleted. > >
I think I might have misunderstood here that I do not need to make changes. Just confirming, Do I need to modify the patch? Pardon me for my late attention to it.
Thanks Aditya
| |