Re: [PATCH 00/11] Introduce support for RISC-V architecture

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

10/05/2022 13:21, Stanisław Kardach:
> On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 4:31 PM David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > >> About the new "Sponsored-by" tag, it should not raise warnings in the
> > >> CI if we agree on its addition.
> > >
> > > I'll modify it in V2 to be in form of:
> > >   Sponsored by: StarFive Technology
> > >   ...
> > >   Signed-off-by: ...
> > > This was suggested by Stephen Hemminger as having a precedent in Linux
> > kernel. Interestingly enough first use of this tag in kernel source was
> > this year in January.
> >
> > I don't have an opinion on the spelling.
> >
> > At the moment, the checks raise a warning:
> > http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/test-report/2022-May/278580.html
> >
> > My point is that for this new tag, either checkpatch.pl in kernel
> > handles it (which I don't think it is the case) or we need to disable
> > the signature check in checkpatch.pl and something is added in dpdk
> > checkpatches.sh to accept all known tags.
> >
> BAD_SIGN_OFF handles more than just tag names (in total there's 10 cases
> checked). I'm not sure replicating this to checkpatches.sh is worth the
> maintenance.
> Alternatively I could ignore BAD_SIGN_OFF on initial checkpatch.pl run and
> then run it again with just the BAD_SIGN_OFF type and filter out the result.
> In that case, what would be the acceptable content of Sponsored-by tag? For
> line:
>   Sponsored-by: StarFive Technology
> Current checkpatch.pl generates (used --terse for brevity):
>   0001-eal-add-initial-support-for-RISC-V-architecture.patch:55:
> WARNING:BAD_SIGN_OFF: Non-standard signature: Sponsored-by:
>   0001-eal-add-initial-support-for-RISC-V-architecture.patch:55:
> ERROR:BAD_SIGN_OFF: Unrecognized email address: 'StarFive Technology'
> 
> Using "Sponsored by:" does not trigger checks above (still feels like a
> hack).

Agree it is a hack,
and not having the hyphen breaks my Vim colouring :)

We can ignore this checkpatch warning, that's fine.