From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: willy@infradead.org (Matthew Wilcox) Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2018 13:01:57 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 2/6] genalloc: selftest In-Reply-To: References: <20180211031920.3424-1-igor.stoppa@huawei.com> <20180211031920.3424-3-igor.stoppa@huawei.com> Message-ID: <20180211210157.GB4680@bombadil.infradead.org> To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 12:27:14PM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 02/11/18 12:22, Philippe Ombredanne wrote: > > nit... For a comment in .h this line should be instead its own comment > > as the first line: > >> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > > Why are we treating header files (.h) differently than .c files? > Either one can use the C++ "//" comment syntax. This is now documented! Documentation/process/license-rules.rst: If a specific tool cannot handle the standard comment style, then the appropriate comment mechanism which the tool accepts shall be used. This is the reason for having the "/\* \*/" style comment in C header files. There was build breakage observed with generated .lds files where 'ld' failed to parse the C++ comment. This has been fixed by now, but there are still older assembler tools which cannot handle C++ style comments. Personally, I find this disappointing. I find this: // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ /* * XArray implementation * Copyright (c) 2017 Microsoft Corporation * Author: Matthew Wilcox */ much less visually appealling than /* * XArray implementation * Copyright (c) 2017 Microsoft Corporation * Author: Matthew Wilcox * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ */ I can't see this variation making a tag extraction tool harder to write. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html