Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:8c0a:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id go10csp236104pxb; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 04:02:00 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzwZ4w2O6/CG3QqR1fyqF9PhTwFwFjyIELxpNG49QjoYRJC6F3BrM6rrsfYsub3nCm9xfyW X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:934c:: with SMTP id p12mr21836410ejw.269.1612267320508; Tue, 02 Feb 2021 04:02:00 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1612267320; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=KLAEGVH1eFNAP3hqCPhzG1bhGvf9LmuAjUEo9BiNoTSA8Pv6geSMzq9v/avDCpSIyx 2ta9MwhcTuBztPl84E6ZsL51tTbuIvZ3BZCs9ABN18YTLSZDyLLHjC/aSlDsKcv6ewGM rYJN7J3tKH1aIRQunz5aAgWSjcWfOTW6N+49VbB5f9ksUe/r5kYGyJ7257GQnGIVuSl3 Lsd5NEE4sYSbQI+pTKJE7VU0rarOZnh7WZhKgyjIKtg+OWtQbXDdHDpVHfoFnKInOl6g Pz0drS0mnQFWatwxSRay16DK80GBU1bKsixI37sx8MqpTMZRuE3NgjGuLb/GOCnygiVp UcaQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=ZULu6WFJuPtL2nCFOTL8soTf+7DMV/lCM4V9cZzdZWM=; b=BAzJpoMa3Tkp5UCS0Ct//47XKXTjal3eoQVeuRYLbrjL2jj6qig7feOQLSOEM4gIGX wPUmqDgULKZyE+te/thbe213dQGz17/vXnM/hXwsTSrja4bkgGYzGZRMnU+HG+RZYhRm 5Yr/AKf8Y+302ouVFnYCW5od8ZAlMEu+5OhnWvWPofArKE0nz6+L72/PKxwJGcMqxWmF EEllKoZdVxcb08S2s4628JIQ6rD0zFsIzHCce9BmRYMK384kkYcHaG/4zhc85EvH5lV6 47oJXThVD/DCQ+SyRcY4tsbJnE8XFPj3T4t1EqKNwKgDiPgC+8G6qO5YtucbbK2UpGTZ dBKw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.s=korg header.b=A9H7Dgb0; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=linuxfoundation.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id m30si3032318edj.75.2021.02.02.04.01.35; Tue, 02 Feb 2021 04:02:00 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.s=korg header.b=A9H7Dgb0; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=linuxfoundation.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230389AbhBBL6O (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 2 Feb 2021 06:58:14 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:42040 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230114AbhBBL5r (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Feb 2021 06:57:47 -0500 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CF2B64F54; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 11:57:06 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1612267026; bh=hJANvgAJx1Itgu/daXTB54JwtMxbyN5SjIal+o1Jncs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=A9H7Dgb0nXZ48uK7JDCHkm4E+ol2lb7pf/o6rWPy8tAKqz33xJuRrkDPoB3YVkJPH UCKCzojMcHBtVqwNLwHxcvLZJgkADYbPNm/ia/WzLRuj+gOQh9A8zMfw3CRISXWSSJ KFmw4SUp42LPKyVE8PPnTUsoc655m+yHWWx7cbAs= Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 12:57:02 +0100 From: Greg KH To: Dwaipayan Ray Cc: Joe Perches , Lukas Bulwahn , linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel Subject: Re: [Linux-kernel-mentees] Patches from the future - can checkpatch help? Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 10:31:33PM +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote: > On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 10:07 PM Greg KH wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 10:04:01PM +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote: > > > Hi, > > > on linux-next, > > > $ git log --pretty=format:"%h%x09%ad" | awk '$6>2021 {print $1}' > > > gives: > > > 4a2d78822fdf > > > 12ca45fea91c > > > 09f2724a786f > > > > > > These are patches from the year 2085, 2037 and 2030 respectively. > > > > > > Would a checkpatch rule be helpful for these or are they too > > > isolated to waste runtime on? > > > > Dates come from your email client, not the patch itself, how is > > checkpatch going to catch this? > > > > I was hoping that the maintainer could catch it before merging it > into his tree. Dates being a trivial thing might slip human eyes, > but checkpatch might detect it there. What is the problem here. You can't treat dates that patches were "created", you have to always go off of the release the patches showed up in. So while you might want to do a sliding scale of 4 months or so, in reality we have patches committed to the tree today that were written years ago. I think I still hold the record for "time it took to get a patch merged" with a very old devfs removal patch, which was many many years... thanks, greg k-h