Quoting Lucas De Marchi (2018-01-23 16:06:16) > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 08:48:01AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Michel Thierry (2018-01-23 00:41:07) > > > On 1/22/2018 4:31 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote: > > > > So for this file what I understand is that it should be: > > > > > > > > // SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT > > > > // Copyright (C) 2014-2018 Intel Corporation > > > > > > So be it. > > > > Oh no, we don't do C++ comments. > > We drm or we kernel devs? > > $ git grep "// SPDX"| wc -l > 4487 > > The suggestion was actually from Linus in the thread I linked. Quoting > here: > > > So in general, the _hope_ is that we can just end up replacing > > existing boilerplate comments with that single line SPDX comment > > (using "//" in *.[ch] files, but obviously some other kinds of files > > end up having a different comment character, typically '#'). > ... > > And yes, feel free to replace block comments with // while at it. > ... > > We already have something like 700 different versions of the same > > silly copyright license boiler-plate due to typos, whitespace > > differences, comment style choices, yadda yadda. Let's avoid that mess > > by just picking _one_ single format and placement for the SPDX line. > > Which I agree with, hence my suggestion. Let me know if it should be > different in drm/ Being consistent is far more important. Documentation/process/coding-style.rst is what we follow, breaking the rule and being inconsistent for copyright headers doesn't make any sense. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
