From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8067535C19B; Fri, 31 Jul 2026 06:26:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785479198; cv=none; b=U+9tlsxgmlstKccMC4HuVOA3U47EFzugX/lEkYXZJCbnxBbCpqEeVRmFsQzDpKZWo966bj1z+EGJoo8VEhY8azMy5m1Lg7gDt2GF4r5hrD5UnuQnOiBu3CIOLAO0uuKtKIC8n2O5+tY1BZwCPXEIhG1hryWzQ73vALPZoX1s72Q= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785479198; c=relaxed/simple; bh=iEaorrPIWjnnAL/wUOG/Gzx8iV7EJSuMXH1DOX6bBIA=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=F9Mhf2GyYEh37TPtUBvhAb2WACuwFkOn0wEOxBu6ApTZnWsMKbMsCiWIRk+QF6Rllku3a7P9TrBGld0kkgwEQHXBAVvxrxBfIBWzV2d5BCfv0mMFrHw+mwdoFtn5ZZ+BTjdYGK4dVLvlw8pyR8sv8JRwlddmyFBEkLOQ7W33Rg4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=VmmirnhZ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="VmmirnhZ" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8B7011F000E9; Fri, 31 Jul 2026 06:26:32 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1785479197; bh=PQIhXfTbx0yzAGf8bUGcZY8/WsMBrulXwzV+ldhMAU0=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=VmmirnhZSnDBExURvDVGPyKmUnXn0VWYd8qU/r4rgyXcSFqU945faBDku6DfSj8g2 d2LRaw3+WjT4Tnu70UG8PaOU6x5d7rHQ5qZD0sITKE92PiIk0U/h6bmEYPbLKGMj6i Sm/q9q3gZkU4MusPYi1uSXA8o8xCG2gLfqDw2hCJsv1Kt6mO3CmPW1Eh4sQCOrM1Fv LREhzmaMgjChKmXf3jFPuHfkl6dZdJhSi8YUNHtDYPkCs9EB2oV/HoasgyCbwA/YGb KGRgMbNnSihKL0KZ4h9fya218Vd6bXqStXmD6sVdwmqv8YwIU1hcFwamYBQIJzW0z6 quNtYrgaMl0fw== Message-ID: <6e7009f3-ed2f-4a84-868b-661b5ac7ab8f@kernel.org> Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 08:26:29 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: warn about possible missing gitignore coverage in selftests To: Cihan Karadag , Jakub Kicinski Cc: Andy Whitcroft , Joe Perches , Dwaipayan Ray , Lukas Bulwahn , Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org References: <20260728052442.626076-1-cihan.cihan@gmail.com> <20260728073143.0e665e36@kernel.org> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski Content-Language: en-US Autocrypt: addr=krzk@kernel.org; keydata= xsFNBFVDQq4BEAC6KeLOfFsAvFMBsrCrJ2bCalhPv5+KQF2PS2+iwZI8BpRZoV+Bd5kWvN79 cFgcqTTuNHjAvxtUG8pQgGTHAObYs6xeYJtjUH0ZX6ndJ33FJYf5V3yXqqjcZ30FgHzJCFUu JMp7PSyMPzpUXfU12yfcRYVEMQrmplNZssmYhiTeVicuOOypWugZKVLGNm0IweVCaZ/DJDIH gNbpvVwjcKYrx85m9cBVEBUGaQP6AT7qlVCkrf50v8bofSIyVa2xmubbAwwFA1oxoOusjPIE J3iadrwpFvsZjF5uHAKS+7wHLoW9hVzOnLbX6ajk5Hf8Pb1m+VH/E8bPBNNYKkfTtypTDUCj NYcd27tjnXfG+SDs/EXNUAIRefCyvaRG7oRYF3Ec+2RgQDRnmmjCjoQNbFrJvJkFHlPeHaeS BosGY+XWKydnmsfY7SSnjAzLUGAFhLd/XDVpb1Een2XucPpKvt9ORF+48gy12FA5GduRLhQU vK4tU7ojoem/G23PcowM1CwPurC8sAVsQb9KmwTGh7rVz3ks3w/zfGBy3+WmLg++C2Wct6nM Pd8/6CBVjEWqD06/RjI2AnjIq5fSEH/BIfXXfC68nMp9BZoy3So4ZsbOlBmtAPvMYX6U8VwD TNeBxJu5Ex0Izf1NV9CzC3nNaFUYOY8KfN01X5SExAoVTr09ewARAQABzSVLcnp5c3p0b2Yg S296bG93c2tpIDxrcnprQGtlcm5lbC5vcmc+wsGPBBMBCgA5AhsDBgsJCAcDAgYVCAIJCgsE FgIDAQIeAQIXgBYhBJvQfg4MUfjVlne3VBuTQ307QWKbBQJp2mE8AAoJEBuTQ307QWKbeaIP /ihHTkTW4KsN/DQ945JJbyu5tI0J80Wue7QyyLPglyKfhgb5cLLNPpOC8cCIJsc7+W3i2P38 s2c1cOH6CYGE7E9ur3Vfme8NW2S2I/Z8VC7bZnzyS23wT17LrsdS/qCpx4o8U+pt/xdXDKph EGRYrIEmMpUWvyYzyYKGIe25FtaayIIKpq8eZYyFcp2f/sG5IkOW5uZzHPMPdcm87jU7fyuQ rAU2vx9r+ulUfQ/q9Z2roC/ode3l7t2pN7BCBCsUDp6JCrUyZrtT1e7EbA0ZRP3aOBNk2P2E DQOgJGjGdO5Yx2Y9LFtltu6JbsBJHi1syGRX3AtQYOMc4Y1WGoeZJmMlvKj2ZqqXNkcWi2DS IQEWB0uW6CqFsBBIMGDa+6OzdaVO/uAVXWDWml02Men3CILdI1MbVjoh8ECqYUY7OQ+JJvNN vnliuq5WM3Ghd3jg/LZZrxXjdIginRHFQCjIJYLKpLZWm1/iDFedcfzqRNYmTtqscdCNHW41 oT3Z7BmO9xwdjuwBS6nmS6JJwkbf5Ot2QR4pB/DRU7ZwjT1qHe+9r9gF32wXVQatHNGK/VVu sfwOnkdxCWkp/qb2gdQRmZh+SedStWshigH6sNfuHBloF/q+hjMRc8b2m326OZdrbSHwY1Sz vti8Hn7n8NjdHO9LKB7BIdjkA9DA5WsqOuVCzsFNBFVDXDQBEADNkrQYSREUL4D3Gws46JEo Z9HEQOKtkrwjrzlw/tCmqVzERRPvz2Xg8n7+HRCrgqnodIYoUh5WsU84N03KlLueMNsWLJBv BaubYN4JuJIdRr4dS4oyF1/fQAQPHh8Thpiz0SAZFx6iWKB7Qrz3OrGCjTPcW6eiOMheesVS 5hxietSmlin+SilmIAPZHx7n242u6kdHOh+/SyLImKn/dh9RzatVpUKbv34eP1wAGldWsRxb f3WP9pFNObSzI/Bo3kA89Xx2rO2roC+Gq4LeHvo7ptzcLcrqaHUAcZ3CgFG88CnA6z6lBZn0 WyewEcPOPdcUB2Q7D/NiUY+HDiV99rAYPJztjeTrBSTnHeSBPb+qn5ZZGQwIdUW9YegxWKvX XHTwB5eMzo/RB6vffwqcnHDoe0q7VgzRRZJwpi6aMIXLfeWZ5Wrwaw2zldFuO4Dt91pFzBSO IpeMtfgb/Pfe/a1WJ/GgaIRIBE+NUqckM+3zJHGmVPqJP/h2Iwv6nw8U+7Yyl6gUBLHFTg2h YnLFJI4Xjg+AX1hHFVKmvl3VBHIsBv0oDcsQWXqY+NaFahT0lRPjYtrTa1v3tem/JoFzZ4B0 p27K+qQCF2R96hVvuEyjzBmdq2esyE6zIqftdo4MOJho8uctOiWbwNNq2U9pPWmu4vXVFBYI GmpyNPYzRm0QPwARAQABwsF2BBgBCgAgAhsMFiEEm9B+DgxR+NWWd7dUG5NDfTtBYpsFAmna YUkACgkQG5NDfTtBYptX+BAApg32CkxwNucNEi8WfWA8oKkW0y8YDuY6ORMo9FWNGiT/OTy0 vyJrLocrpn86zwfjVp+eCrssPYh8eqJfnWqmYv6ACQtHPYzPZQ3mSo8H97Z01oUxITzCxpXm ZkLgPIqtDPcC2E3dPM/fVxcyowM8XsaMA9wcsaUYrta8toOq2b9tKcjleKMfMrm0gQ9u7wUc QbLkwj6TCLOwucb07GXzLTNF9PZmaDUpKAZjMjmrW+le+SFvQbhamx0rxLWPR0NWntXpbCn+ +ACch03p/JyTBVktxFsFyCt7pTPE1kEaeuXBTe/a2D9iQvRxRW19LvuO2e59/u1wYUiH/orz wbIC2S4dBsPAPihL3ztOU1yE86GPyQtSE0kU+/7snnLt4QGi6PChf3t5gnNjAzjUUovO8rgI c+5yN5heq5loYHgK6OQ9OlHzsPHO9e9MOQcKlFycs1pyijFGzDwdNUm/SchK8iWT2QApTx4A K9bCVaboTA2T77QYkRcRJYSsO1alGX0ome/hMLD1daXlkrNUp1HWa3K4iytLRXjCSIorWiGs n+q3krnpXu3TFkA8qtOFZMdnIiFuiq1yLT8hptsV5xh1TA2nsVvSYiaCr3q4s4BKjS/KrLDb qoxzw8ISjdUp4pA85vb6YLCmb39NgidD+7PmAr65lBNveIFynTgsja1rRQ4= In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 29/07/2026 10:01, Cihan Karadag wrote: > On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 8:31 AM Jakub Kicinski wrote: >> >> On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 23:24:41 -0600 Cihan Karadag wrote: >>> Per selftests documentation [1], every generated test binary must be >>> added to gitignore to prevent leaving untracked files in the kernel >>> tree. >>> >>> This is an easy mistake to make when adding a new test. In fact, a >>> search of selftests history turns up dozens of standalone follow-up >>> patches with titles like "add missing gitignore for ", each >>> needed only because the original patch adding a new test >>> didn't also update gitignore. >>> >>> Add a SELFTESTS_GITIGNORE check that warns about gitignore coverage >>> whenever a patch adds a new file under tools/testing/selftests/, the >>> same way FILE_PATH_CHANGES warns about MAINTAINERS on any added, >>> moved, or deleted file. >> >> What percentage of changes to selftests from last 2 releases will >> false-positive trigger this? Would be good to know, checkpatch has >> a tendency of generating false positives which is quite counter >> productive. > > It will trigger whenever a new file is added to selftests, which has > a chance of introducing a test artifact into the tree. I checked the > last 20 commits touching selftests and only 6 of them were new file > additions, so this warning would have fired 6 times. Actually, one of > those 6 had a missing gitignore entry that this check is supposed to > warn about (fuse_acl_cache_test, 9acb102522b9). > > Comparing to other WARNINGs that checkpatch generates, such as > FILE_PATH_CHANGES which has existed since 2014, this seems like a > reasonable and already accepted way for checkpatch to operate. > > For comparison, I checked the last 20 commits that triggered > FILE_PATH_CHANGES in the tree, and none of them actually needed a > MAINTAINERS update. FILE_PATH_CHANGES causes many false-positives, honestly for my work of getting 100-200 commits per release it was screaming like 20% of time and never had it right. All of its reports are false positives to me. And I saw many times people do weird commits and weird MAINTAINERS updates, just because checkpatch asked them. So your argument of "reasonable and already accepted way for checkpatch to operate" is simply wrong. Don't add more poor tests jut because we have one which is IMO terrible. > >> In netdev CI at least we build the selftests and check >> if there are any untracked files after. > > That is a good practice. But as evidenced by commits already in the > tree, this type of coverage does not exist in all places. > > Since this is a mistake that is frequently made, I think it deserves You did not prove that. > a warning on its own. In the end I think it is acceptable that this > warning fires more than necessary, the same way FILE_PATH_CHANGES No, it is not acceptable. > does, because the cost of an extra check is low and the mistakes it > warns about are easy to miss. Best regards, Krzysztof