On Fri, 2018-12-14 at 12:16 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 18:35:28 +0100 Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz <jorge.ramirez-ortiz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > As per Documentation/process/submitting-patches, Co-developed-by is a
> > valid signature.
> >
>
> I'm with Joe - I find this tag kinda useless and duplicative. But whatever.
>
> But as the documentation says, Co-developed-by must be accompanied by a
> Signed-off-by:. It would be helpful if checkpatch were to detect a
> failure to do this.
perhaps
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 15 ++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 93e84c9504a1..056d4b47ffaf 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -2673,7 +2673,20 @@ sub process {
WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
"Duplicate signature\n" . $herecurr);
} else {
- $signatures{$sig_nospace} = 1;
+ $signatures{$sig_nospace} = $herecurr;
+ }
+ }
+
+# Check for "Co-developed-by:" uses without equivalent "Signed-off-by:"
+# $signatures keys are all lower case without spaces
+ if ($rawline =~ /^---$/) {
+ foreach my $sig (keys %signatures) {
+ next if ($sig !~ /^co-developed-by:(.*)/);
+ my $signer = $1;
+ if (!defined $signatures{"signed-off-by:$signer"}) {
+ WARN("CODEVELOPED_WITHOUT_SIGNOFF",
+ "Co-developed-by: used without Signed-off-by: by same person\n" . $signatures{$sig});
+ }
}
}
