Re: Fw: [PATCH 0/2] feat: checkpatch: prohibit Buglink: and warn about missing Link:

From: Thorsten Leemhuis
Date: Tue Dec 06 2022 - 05:11:49 EST


On 06.12.22 10:21, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-12-06 at 09:50 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> On 06.12.22 08:44, Joe Perches wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2022-12-06 at 08:17 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>>> On 06.12.22 07:27, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>>>> On 06.12.22 06:54, Joe Perches wrote:
> [...]
>> Ha, I considered doing something like that when I wrote my earlier mail,
>> but was to lazy. :-D thx!
>>
>> Yeah, they are not that often, but I grew tired arguing about that,
>> that's why I think checkpatch is the better place and in the better
>> position to handle that.
>
> I'm not sure that "Patchwork:" is a reasonable prefix.

/me neither

> Is that documented anywhere?

Couldn't find anything.

>> Anyway, so how to move forward now? Do you insist on a allow list (IOW:
>> a Link: or Patchwork: before every http...)? Or is a disallow list with
>> the most common unwanted tags for links (that you thankfully compiled)
>> fine for you as well?
>
> Maybe
> ---
> scripts/checkpatch.pl | 7 +++++++
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> index 1c3d13e65c2d0..a526a354cdfbc 100755
> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> @@ -3250,6 +3250,13 @@ sub process {
> $commit_log_possible_stack_dump = 0;
> }
>
> +# Check for odd prefixes before a URI/URL
> + if ($in_commit_log &&
> + $line =~ /^\s*(\w+):\s*http/ && $1 !~ /^(?:Link|Patchwork)/) {
> + WARN("PREFER_LINK",
> + "Unusual link reference '$1:', prefer 'Link:'\n" . $herecurr);
> + }
> +

LGTM: I did some tests and it seem to do the right thing. Can we have
your Signed-off-by: for that snippet?

Ciao, Thorsten