Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | Dwaipayan Ray <> | Date | Sun, 20 Sep 2020 21:52:34 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] checkpatch: extend author Signed-off-by check for split From: header |
| |
On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 8:39 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 2020-09-20 at 14:47 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote: > > Checkpatch did not handle cases where the author From: header > > was split into multiple lines. The author identity could not > > be resolved and checkpatch generated a false NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF > > warning. > > Hi Dwaipayan. > > > A typical example is Commit e33bcbab16d1 ("tee: add support for > > session's client UUID generation"). When checkpatch was run on > > this commit, it displayed: > > > > "WARNING:NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF: Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal > > patch author ''" > > > > This was due to split header lines not being handled properly and > > the author himself wrote in Commit cd2614967d8b ("checkpatch: warn > > if missing author Signed-off-by"): > > > > "Split From: headers are not fully handled: only the first part > > is compared." > > > > Support split From: headers by correctly parsing the header > > extension lines. RFC 2822, Section-2.2.3 stated that each extended > > line must start with a WSP character (a space or htab). The solution > > was therefore to concatenate the lines which start with a WSP to > > get the correct long header. > > This is a good commit message, though I believe the > latest rfc is 5322. I'm not sure there is any real > difference in the referenced section though. > > While your patch seems to work for git format-email, > other emailers seem to set headers that have multiple > whitespace chars that should be collapsed into a > single space. > > I think you'll find that the eliding all whitespace > after header folding causes mismatches for emails. > > For instance: > > From: "=?UTF-8?q?Christian=20K=C3=B6nig?=" > <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com> > > Always inserting a single space if there is any > whitespace after the folding WSP might be better > otherwise this is decoded as > > From: "Christian König"<ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com> >
Hi, I think eliding all whitespaces shouldn't cause an issue because at the end of the From: header parser block, there is a call to reformat_email($author).
$author =~ s/"//g; $author = reformat_email($author);
The subroutine reformat_email reparses the author string such that the correct name <address> format is maintainined.
In revision b3b33d3c43bb, line 1206: sub reformat_email { my ($email) = @_; my ($email_name, $name_comment, $email_address, $comment) = parse_email($email); return format_email($email_name, $email_address); }
And I also checked the format_email subroutine: line 1997: if ("$name" eq "") { $formatted_email = "$address"; } else { $formatted_email = "$name <$address>"; } return $formatted_email;
So I think the author string is basically reconstructed to maintain the correct format.
As you pointed out, at first the author string might be: "Christian König"<ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com>
But after reformat_email is called, $author should be: Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com>
So, I think there won't be any problem. Is my observation correct?
> What I have does a bit more by saving any post-folding > > "From: <name and email address>" > > and comparing that to any "name and perhaps different > email address" in a Signed-off-by: line. > > A new message is emitted if the name matches but the > email address is different. > > Perhaps it's reasonable to apply your patch and then > update it with something like the below: > --- > scripts/checkpatch.pl | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > index 3e474072aa90..1ecc179e938d 100755 > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > @@ -1240,6 +1240,15 @@ sub same_email_addresses { > $email1_address eq $email2_address; > } > > +sub same_email_names { > + my ($email1, $email2) = @_; > + > + my ($email1_name, $name1_comment, $email1_address, $comment1) = parse_email($email1); > + my ($email2_name, $name2_comment, $email2_address, $comment2) = parse_email($email2); > + > + return $email1_name eq $email2_name; > +} > + > sub which { > my ($bin) = @_; > > @@ -2679,20 +2688,32 @@ sub process { > } > > # Check the patch for a From: > - if (decode("MIME-Header", $line) =~ /^From:\s*(.*)/) { > + if ($line =~ /^From:\s*(.*)/i) { > $author = $1; > - $author = encode("utf8", $author) if ($line =~ /=\?utf-8\?/i); > + my $curline = $linenr; > + while (defined($rawlines[$curline]) && $rawlines[$curline++] =~ /^\s(\s+)?(.*)/) { > + $author .= ' ' if (defined($1)); > + $author .= "$2"; > + } > + if ($author =~ /=\?utf-8\?/i) { > + $author = decode("MIME-Header", $author); > + $author = encode("utf8", $author); > + } > + > $author =~ s/"//g; > $author = reformat_email($author); > } > > # Check the patch for a signoff: > if ($line =~ /^\s*signed-off-by:\s*(.*)/i) { > + my $sig = $1; > $signoff++; > $in_commit_log = 0; > if ($author ne '') { > - if (same_email_addresses($1, $author)) { > - $authorsignoff = 1; > + if (same_email_addresses($sig, $author)) { > + $authorsignoff = "1"; > + } elsif (same_email_names($sig, $author)) { > + $authorsignoff = $sig; > } > } > } > @@ -6937,6 +6958,9 @@ sub process { > } elsif (!$authorsignoff) { > WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF", > "Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal patch author '$author'\n"); > + } elsif ($authorsignoff ne "1") { > + WARN("NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF", > + "From:/SoB: email address mismatch: 'From: $author' != 'Signed-off-by: $authorsignoff'\n"); > } > } > >
Yes, this is definitely more logical ! I was actually hoping to talk with you on this.
The code you sent better handles name mismatches when email addresses are same. But I also have found several such commits in which the author have signed off using a different email address than the one which he/she used to send the patch.
For example, Lukas checked commits between v5.4 and v5.8 and he found: 175 Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal patch author 'Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>'
Infact in all of those commits he signed off using a different mail, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>. So is it possible to resolve these using perhaps .mailmap entries? Or should only the name mismatch part be better handled? Or perhaps both?
Also, I would like to know if there are any more changes required for the current patch or if it is good to go?
Thanks, Dwaipayan.
| |