From: "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>
To: Nabih Estefan <nabihestefan@google.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, peter.maydell@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Ignore removed lines in license check
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2025 10:24:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aMp-MzBE19NORy4Y@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250916165928.10048-1-nabihestefan@google.com>
On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 04:59:28PM +0000, Nabih Estefan wrote:
> When running the license check, if we are updating a license it is
> possible for the checkpatch script to test against old license lines
> instead of newer ones, since the removal lines appear before the
> addition lines in a .patch file.
While we match the "SPDX-License-Identifier" text in any context,
the "file must have SDPX" validation is only performed against
files that are entirely new:
# Called at the end of processing a diff hunk for a file
sub process_end_of_file {
my $fileinfo = shift;
if ($fileinfo->{action} eq "new" &&
!exists $fileinfo->{facts}->{sawspdx}) {
...raise error ....
> Fix this by skipping over lines that start with "-" in the checkpatch
> script.
A new file cannot have any "-" lines present, so there isn't any
bug that needs fixing AFAICT. Can you show any patch or commit
where this would have made a difference to what checkpatch.pl
reports ?
>
> Signed-off-by: Nabih Estefan <nabihestefan@google.com>
> ---
> scripts/checkpatch.pl | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> index 833f20f555..c57a423f9f 100755
> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> @@ -1813,7 +1813,8 @@ sub process {
> }
>
> # Check SPDX-License-Identifier references a permitted license
> - if ($rawline =~ m,SPDX-License-Identifier: (.*?)(\*/)?\s*$,) {
> + if (($rawline =~ m,SPDX-License-Identifier: (.*?)(\*/)?\s*$,) &&
> + $rawline !~ /^-/) {
> $fileinfo->{facts}->{sawspdx} = 1;
> &checkspdx($realfile, $1);
> }
> --
> 2.51.0.384.g4c02a37b29-goog
>
With regards,
Daniel
--
|: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-17 9:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-16 16:59 [PATCH] checkpatch: Ignore removed lines in license check Nabih Estefan
2025-09-17 9:00 ` Alex Bennée
2025-09-17 9:24 ` Daniel P. Berrangé [this message]
2025-09-17 15:16 ` Nabih Estefan
2025-09-17 16:05 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2025-09-17 16:17 ` Nabih Estefan
2025-09-17 16:24 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2025-09-17 16:43 ` Alex Bennée
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=aMp-MzBE19NORy4Y@redhat.com \
--to=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=nabihestefan@google.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).