Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:c7d3:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id h19csp106470pxy; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 01:44:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyuvQKTVlg84Jyf701M01nUh+ZR6obf0sFZuKMd3S7kH+E1zvpM/czeFRIKT2tDeT5Z7gFL X-Received: by 2002:a92:d7c1:: with SMTP id g1mr4652539ilq.24.1628930656496; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 01:44:16 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1628930656; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=01r+kSHh1ENz/rnOMDKt0fIOt54kbPR5/N1r+p4aOsaZWgZ9zhXhnRI5HkXkfymZDb FJh4zW+msZaxzDLuvnCvVJqZDt+xZK3upoxy02UIGMXVp9LGSpOn/UosufHZ8GKRkOFi SWXopiVyPuyqrSyhC8keTU0N6OwKbhACLjMUEXVv9HSUrXZegq3ANG3G7Bf+eZIz1zMD lJk6ZH2hsBravR4Fd8BehjT+vsvMqclscHM0w9fFc0nPCw498S0gVXQrewJgmmX3kJTD FpBFiLwtgT6J6YQyOfKj+H/sGQUGQLQabUnaKLCcyc+j4x9BTN5HU6DP0+ijthUBGkee vzAw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=4uQaa0C4LRAVBFfYsZnRfLqcfZ45qVVswcaexgzhtgM=; b=qVaoDLT3Yj4J1aNaMm10G0O3p9cFkJYBwzTBNZCRiUWZNHMvkIg4wUDcnkI7DJvTVK cFPhX2ls2eDNQ/Ve0roTBYBGIcZOri6Sj5GGDyhRcJZbjrQ0Ern1//OnVMmoIoglflMv 2z35VtSsgiSvIyHv55onFc47MKRcRnoNpzt5PMLqiCFFRnAMPVMHJz8uBIKHZWSPLLY8 5JQAUteW5KZ1O93IZ/cMas3+LMWqLwyFbPUti12AqP7tTFtzkTcPMVLtSM7nor5zTpIc ZuWzudBNQMAvVQlCaMnJbN7cWdfr+fnBCByTw1bNqo4660uA9vHyx94Dzl6hucT11xMF dBXg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=QbbmvcXg; 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=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id d1si4363600ila.26.2021.08.14.01.44.04; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 01:44:16 -0700 (PDT) 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=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=QbbmvcXg; 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=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237547AbhHNInw (ORCPT + 99 others); Sat, 14 Aug 2021 04:43:52 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56710 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233972AbhHNInk (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Aug 2021 04:43:40 -0400 Received: from mail-yb1-xb36.google.com (mail-yb1-xb36.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b36]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD4E9C06175F for ; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 01:43:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb1-xb36.google.com with SMTP id 202so2070429ybc.0 for ; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 01:43:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=4uQaa0C4LRAVBFfYsZnRfLqcfZ45qVVswcaexgzhtgM=; b=QbbmvcXgy0HXw0H1ngbaSKrhn7QdbRS9+huMKbGDKwT3pulUw9tBepSms4/5gAdWXZ vjCpU7X0yD0eRaQFX8wLcFrCIruL8Zcn98SMYf3QVK/M4x6csdn7YZ5g4SF83QVTPFjV xujZtxPZRP9oivORBJea5i4mOkbpEYZMikto4OZzWKdxCD2WkhwDFp2C9kg4ZvceGRGL cn8I1b6lebJjTf++x4fsX3Xyo7XBRuNIDuMf6VMMkPLf8h8P0+mxQ6Mo60SGa/iHN+qd QquiblL/NSUK+8B2zW8/bBlNR4YhswEYVA4nVtaUfwezDp7TaFtKgbnC3IwIRpgRaUSk UfEQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4uQaa0C4LRAVBFfYsZnRfLqcfZ45qVVswcaexgzhtgM=; b=FVoOhMFUAeDiGKQJx0uxN+hX5BYgxCdRfqOkWegdyzM/nb5JkUzm5SXFVaTEzb4rTB 5gj+Nu3PI4dZNw8pw5RuHcbtLbgLipY66otm3AhyZ1HcWiRegpHkI9WgB+Lq3xCsJgLg CnwBLcF58OgkNgYjU7InwMvigenChy3Lx1VNRgcO3ASyKwJk/R1REDdbCYKz+j3yRlct KKF4wCqx4SD8MOunTO8alySv7JO918I9+lEwmTWtlsZDcT2xHdect/1dkUkKxarC6/ct QXKVE7xArPT7oEeLM0wxjYYrVTWnv/d41EMZ/q16asuEjUlP7SdSaDHwHDEmnT602HIS TSgw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5316tZfpMBV22d0tTldP9YRJFhniXDWBcvoUqY/pJb1NEBqXEilb 3EerK2SPxqZOWinx4lQcdu4n8oLjCz4BAgCbIUU= X-Received: by 2002:a25:3046:: with SMTP id w67mr8327328ybw.134.1628930590367; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 01:43:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210714082608.28918-1-someguy@effective-light.com> In-Reply-To: <20210714082608.28918-1-someguy@effective-light.com> From: Lukas Bulwahn Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2021 10:43:00 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: fix an issue regarding the git commit description style test To: Hamza Mahfooz Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andy Whitcroft , Joe Perches , Dwaipayan Ray Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 10:26 AM Hamza Mahfooz wrote: > > If we consider the output of the following command: > > $ git shortlog | grep '"' | wc -l > 14185 > > It becomes apparent that quite a number of commits have titles that, > contain at least one quotation mark and if you attempt to refer to those > commits in a new patch, checkpatch throws a false positive. This is > because, checkpatch disallows the use of quotation marks in commit titles, > only when referring to those commits in commit descriptions. > Joe will certainly have the final say on this. But just some remarks and hints from my side that might help all of us judge this change: 14185 commits with at least one quotation mark might sound a lot, but given that we have surpassed the one million commits, 14 thousand commits is basically 1,4% so really a small fraction. Checkpatch is a really large set of heuristics, many rules are much more fuzzy and 'wrong' for much larger classes than 1,4% of potential cases. So, we are improving the heuristics here of a rule that is already very good, compared to other checkpatch rules. For all changes to checkpatch, that Dwaipayan (see CC), my former mentee, contributed, we always ran a checkpatch evaluation on the latest ~100,000 commits and checked the difference of before and after the change to check if the change had some unexpected negative effect besides its intended positive effect. I would suggest that you do that too and share the results of that evaluation with us. If you need some assistance or guidance on how to create such a quick checkpatch evaluation, please just let Dwaipayan and me know and we might give some further hints. I hope this helps. Lukas