From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B391C001E0 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 14:17:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229807AbjJWORL (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Oct 2023 10:17:11 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56964 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229578AbjJWORK (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Oct 2023 10:17:10 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x62f.google.com (mail-ej1-x62f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66301B3; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 07:17:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x62f.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-9c603e2354fso700753266b.1; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 07:17:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1698070627; x=1698675427; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=psYa+jnhYhA/Me9tMdYWGK89iV6ZDBFIZP/pQeD1uzc=; b=lJnG6Atm0YVpq16+S9zOHOCEaFMObn8xk+Moj1iug2ek5HRv2Z6GouIhXHMXBEB0qW CmkeV9UsI+R5ZA5ZzO1rypA/b0B7q1DCV0+2xrWICxJP9VlN62WIAkioOy3Fxg3uI74D /mA1jBhvEEzX6fHnji2ygfUXXB3sTqRv6l6SKSnJfojAqh7g13wsd9zNNUSx6lAEH87y VQEmiaQ4vx8MH3PA1zCrRP8s3O44TKBCLDVKt9nhvvFYBX1ItgLGDx8P4lVaYsmbHy8P 4dDk8LpRWVIVpZkQ+EljyPlKdYrCZ2iMkCAphvzkzqaF9XnEubEXmamfqpO2jZb36flY N8Zg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1698070627; x=1698675427; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=psYa+jnhYhA/Me9tMdYWGK89iV6ZDBFIZP/pQeD1uzc=; b=Y3ioYhPlCuMTysT7A8o4A3Z451cn4ByXcYSa6S1V4RFEsRPGZ6Bg5edOxZGqkZd1ki Mcl7L7tgXJ6ZExyqI2vzJqafFMPenwle71k1F8fBiLienEsiFP+QsqsLARNZ8MNITeNy IEcAF0wr8gcW2XClAgVUzwhYexwj5xekJfYyhVA7GxPokK+v3fDUSecRqNF/0Ytlf5oD JTj52PxOG7RqICUVP5ZHsoA1ABXqFc2tMTAjdRFspesLNRb14lPiGYxwyHFP3wC+CXlq KhTuaDYViwI9l34nv8IrCLwE08exdaVWEIRvy9CtjqVLvzNkxzRKgqRQFu7V4+K68ppo l3sg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwMOxoDK8vzr69N4QcSvzgFv9FklJBYFTHdyCxkdB0vGoISShoo rR6hGGa8/RNIbtB/j+pmgufNUgfzrXbiL9um4bE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFVR84iaxW5JTSSwCylYDnHrJuy/QOC9TeTDd/7izvh1HJa8XLVoWYXfvL0h/RAiLVXysMlSryrZfXrwsAoTtg= X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:9727:b0:9ae:5513:e475 with SMTP id jg39-20020a170907972700b009ae5513e475mr9252000ejc.9.1698070626608; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 07:17:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20231023102846.14830-1-przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20231023102846.14830-1-przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com> From: Lukas Bulwahn Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2023 16:16:55 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: allow tags between co-developed-by and their sign-off To: Przemek Kitszel Cc: Andy Whitcroft , Joe Perches , Dwaipayan Ray , Sean Christopherson , workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Jacob Keller Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org Hi Przemek, On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 12:29=E2=80=AFPM Przemek Kitszel wrote: > > Allow additional tags between Co-developed-by: and Signed-off-by:. > > Removing the "immediately" word from the doc is a great summary of the > change - there is no need for the two tags to be glued together, barring > ease of checkpatch implementation. > I think the currently suggested process of keeping Co-developed-by and Signed-off-by glued together is good, and I see no reason why this should be changed, nor do I see any drawbacks. > 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 > the Submitter. > The other tags, Reviewed-by, etc., can go anywhere just not between Co-developed-by and corresponding Signed-off-by. So, why do you have this need to put it exactly there rather than putting it anywhere else? The commit message tells me what you are proposing, but there is no rationale in the commit message and that is put up for discussion here with the proposed change. I see many potential areas of work for the checkpatch script, but in my humble opinion, this really is not one of the rules that needs to be improved. Lukas (...snipped the rest...)