Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180906092100.GA27302@linux.intel.com>
References: <20180827185507.17087-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <20180827185507.17087-12-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <CAHp75VcqKunkHYNdd287_F7APHwYr7K9QD2PVCkqBqJWG2_E-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180905173355.GE11368@linux.intel.com> <CAHp75Vc2SZUfRnBPZ9xJ_B=KJL7yK9hqRZiFOTswn0AzjnLD1A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180906092100.GA27302@linux.intel.com>
From:   Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 6 Sep 2018 19:35:46 +0200
Message-ID: <CANiq72kpY1y2aPH+GMi8mWZdttfdYJ3wk0cvE_qVD97vdvTJbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 11/13] platform/x86: Intel SGX driver
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
        "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@kernel.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        sean.j.christopherson@intel.com, nhorman@redhat.com,
        npmccallum@redhat.com, linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org,
        serge.ayoun@intel.com, shay.katz-zamir@intel.com,
        "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@infradead.org>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
        Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Jarkko,

On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 11:21 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen
<jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> There is another open. If I grep through the kernel tree I see SPDX
> headers that are decorated both with C99- and C89-style comments. I
> guess I ended up using C99-style because when I was instructed to add
> SPDX headers in the first place that was the example I was given. Still
> checkpatch.pl complains about C99-style comments.
>
> Which one is right and why the kernel tree is polluted with C99-headers
> when they do not pass checkpatch.pl? How those commits were ever
> accepted?

See Documentation/process/license-rules.rst. Headers should go with
C-style comments:

   The SPDX license identifier is added in form of a comment.  The comment
   style depends on the file type::

      C source: // SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression>
      C header: /* SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression> */

And:

   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.

The ones that got in are probably either old or they slipped through
(and they do not break the build).

Cheers,
Miguel