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;
Message-ID: <8536d4a99103982688de6cdaeea51bc92a67af90.camel@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] checkpatch: Add check item for RFC tags is outside
 the subject prefix
From:   Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To:     Cai Huoqing <caihuoqing@baidu.com>
Cc:     Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@gmail.com>,
        Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date:   Fri, 15 Oct 2021 09:50:58 -0700
In-Reply-To: <20211015075853.4038-1-caihuoqing@baidu.com>
References: <20211015075853.4038-1-caihuoqing@baidu.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.40.4-1 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 2021-10-15 at 15:58 +0800, Cai Huoqing wrote:
> Some patches have been sent, the RFC tag of which is
> outside the subject prefix is incorrect. like this:
> "Subject: [PATCH v2] RFC:"
> 
> Perfer "Subject: [RFC PATCH v2]" to "Subject: [PATCH v2] RFC:",
> so add check item for it.

typo of prefer but does this matter enough to make it a test?

Same typo in next patch.

> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
[]
> @@ -3121,6 +3121,12 @@ sub process {
>  			     "A patch subject line should describe the change not the tool that found it\n" . $herecurr);
>  		}
>  
> +# Check if RFC tags is outside the subject prefix
> +		if ($in_header_lines && $line =~ /^Subject:.*patch\s*.*]\s*rfc:/i) {
> +			WARN("RFC_TAG_PREFIX",
> +			     "RFC tag is outside subject prefix, try \"git format-patch --rfc\"\n" . $herecurr);
> +		}
> +
>  # Check for Gerrit Change-Ids not in any patch context
>  		if ($realfile eq '' && !$has_patch_separator && $line =~ /^\s*change-id:/i) {
>  			if (ERROR("GERRIT_CHANGE_ID",