[PATCH v2 1/1] checkpatch: Don't warn on "orhapned" DT schema file

[PATCH v2 1/1] checkpatch: Don't warn on "orhapned" DT schema file

[Andy Shevchenko]

Currently checkpatch warns is the DT schema file is absent in MAINTAINERS.
However the DT schema files are self-contained in this sense and
have embedded information about maintainers of it. This is a requirement.
Hence, avoid checkpatch warning about it.

Requested-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Tested-by: Akhilesh Patil <akhilesh@ee.iitb.ac.in>
Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
---

v2: drop some leftovers

 scripts/checkpatch.pl | 9 ++++++---
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 6729f18e5654..db274a7c2fb0 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -3441,9 +3441,12 @@ sub process {
 		     ($line =~ /\{\s*([\w\/\.\-]*)\s*\=\>\s*([\w\/\.\-]*)\s*\}/ &&
 		      (defined($1) || defined($2))))) {
 			$is_patch = 1;
-			$reported_maintainer_file = 1;
-			WARN("FILE_PATH_CHANGES",
-			     "added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating?\n" . $herecurr);
+			# DT bindings are incorporate maintainer information, no need to report
+			if ($realfile !~ m@^Documentation/devicetree/bindings/@)) {
+				$reported_maintainer_file = 1;
+				WARN("FILE_PATH_CHANGES",
+				     "added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating?\n" . $herecurr);
+			}
 		}
 
 # Check for adding new DT bindings not in schema format
-- 
2.50.1

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] checkpatch: Don't warn on "orhapned" DT schema file

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 27/10/2025 10:17, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> Currently checkpatch warns is the DT schema file is absent in MAINTAINERS.
> However the DT schema files are self-contained in this sense and
> have embedded information about maintainers of it. This is a requirement.
> Hence, avoid checkpatch warning about it.
> 
> Requested-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>

No, that's not true.

First, there is no such tag. Second, I never requested it.

NAK


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] checkpatch: Don't warn on "orhapned" DT schema file

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Mon, Oct 27, 2025 at 10:25:58AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 27/10/2025 10:17, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Currently checkpatch warns is the DT schema file is absent in MAINTAINERS.
> > However the DT schema files are self-contained in this sense and
> > have embedded information about maintainers of it. This is a requirement.
> > Hence, avoid checkpatch warning about it.
> > 
> > Requested-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
> 
> No, that's not true.
> 
> First, there is no such tag.

No, that's not true.

$ git log --oneline --grep ^Requested-by: | wc -l
357

> Second, I never requested it.
> 
> NAK

Fair enough, I'll drop the tag.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] checkpatch: Don't warn on "orhapned" DT schema file

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 27/10/2025 10:35, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2025 at 10:25:58AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 27/10/2025 10:17, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> Currently checkpatch warns is the DT schema file is absent in MAINTAINERS.
>>> However the DT schema files are self-contained in this sense and
>>> have embedded information about maintainers of it. This is a requirement.
>>> Hence, avoid checkpatch warning about it.
>>>
>>> Requested-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
>>
>> No, that's not true.
>>
>> First, there is no such tag.
> 
> No, that's not true.
> 
> $ git log --oneline --grep ^Requested-by: | wc -l


No, you do like this:
git grep Requested-by
and then find it in the list of approved tags.

> 357
> 
>> Second, I never requested it.
>>
>> NAK
> 
> Fair enough, I'll drop the tag.


It's not even solving the problem you wanted. You claimed there is some
sort of problem that maintainer update is one at last patch of patchset.
I claimed that there is no, because it is standard and completely fine
way of doing things and whatever checkpatch is reported is just false
positive.

You did not fix that false positive.

Best regards,
Krzysztof