Re: [PATCH] scripts: Add intended executable mode and SPDX license

[Greg KH]

On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 11:49:31AM +0200, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, 27 Aug 2020, Greg KH wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 02:54:05PM +0530, Mrinal Pandey wrote:
> > > commit b72231eb7084 ("scripts: add spdxcheck.py self test") added the file
> > > spdxcheck-test.sh to the repository without the executable flag and license
> > > information.
> > > 
> > > commit eb8305aecb95 ("scripts: Coccinelle script for namespace
> > > dependencies.") added the file nsdeps, commit 313dd1b62921 ("gcc-plugins:
> > > Add the randstruct plugin") added the file gcc-plugins/gen-random-seed.sh
> > > and commit 9b4ade226f74 ("xen: build infrastructure for generating
> > > hypercall depending symbols") added the file xen-hypercalls.sh without the
> > > executable bit.
> > > 
> > > Set to usual modes for these files and provide the SPDX license for
> > > spdxcheck-test.sh. No functional changes.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Mrinal Pandey <mrinalmni@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > applies cleanly on next-20200827
> > > 
> > > Kees, Matthias, Thomas, please ack this patch.
> > > 
> > > Andrew, please pick this minor non-urgent cleanup patch once the
> > > mainainers ack.
> > > 
> > >  scripts/gcc-plugins/gen-random-seed.sh | 0
> > >  scripts/nsdeps                         | 0
> > >  scripts/spdxcheck-test.sh              | 1 +
> > >  scripts/xen-hypercalls.sh              | 0
> > >  4 files changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > >  mode change 100644 => 100755 scripts/gcc-plugins/gen-random-seed.sh
> > >  mode change 100644 => 100755 scripts/nsdeps
> > >  mode change 100644 => 100755 scripts/spdxcheck-test.sh
> > >  mode change 100644 => 100755 scripts/xen-hypercalls.sh
> > 
> > This does 2 different things in one patch, shouldn't this be 2 different
> > patches?  One to change the permissions and one to add the SPDX line?
> >
> 
> For me, this was one thing: minor cleanup; and taking one 
> minor patch is easier than taking two, but you make the call. Then, the 
> two or even three patches would also just travel through different trees, 
> the spdx tree and Andrew's.

License "additions" are good to separate from other changes, in case
people have questions/comments/objections about them, they can be easier
to discuss and possibly reverted.

More patches is not a problem :)

thanks,

greg k-h