Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 20 Mar 2023 20:28:45 +0300 | From | Dmitry Rokosov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] checkpatch: add missing bindings license check |
| |
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 10:12:27AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > On Mon, 2023-03-20 at 13:00 +0300, Dmitry Rokosov wrote: > > All headers from 'include/dt-bindings/' must be verified by checkpatch > > together with Documentation bindings, because all of them are part of > > the whole DT bindings system. > > > > The requirement is dual licensed and matching pattern: > > /GPL-2\.0(?:-only|-or-later|\+)? (?:OR|or) BSD-2-Clause/ > > > > The issue was found during patch review: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230313201259.19998-4-ddrokosov@sberdevices.ru/ > > > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Rokosov <ddrokosov@sberdevices.ru> > > --- > > Changes v2 since v1 at [1]: > > - include/dt-bindings check is aligned to open parens > > - introduce more strict pattern for bindings license: > > /GPL-2\.0(?:-only|-or-later|\+)? (?:OR|or) BSD-2-Clause/ > > > > Links: > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230317201621.15518-1-ddrokosov@sberdevices.ru/ > > --- > > scripts/checkpatch.pl | 5 +++-- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > OK but: > > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > [] > > @@ -3709,8 +3709,9 @@ sub process { > > WARN("SPDX_LICENSE_TAG", > > "'$spdx_license' is not supported in LICENSES/...\n" . $herecurr); > > } > > - if ($realfile =~ m@^Documentation/devicetree/bindings/@ && > > - not $spdx_license =~ /GPL-2\.0.*BSD-2-Clause/) { > > + if (($realfile =~ m@^Documentation/devicetree/bindings/@ || > > + $realfile =~ m@^include/dt-bindings/@) && > > + not $spdx_license =~ /GPL-2\.0(?:-only|-or-later|\+)? (?:OR|or) BSD-2-Clause/) { > > I believe this is the only checkpatch use of > not <foo> =~ <bar> > instead of > <foo> !~ <bar> > > I prefer !~ >
You are totally right. Only this place uses such strange comparing. Let me fix it and prepare new version quickly :)
-- Thank you, Dmitry
| |