Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation: checkpatch: Add SYMBOLIC_PERMS message

[Dwaipayan Ray]

On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 1:53 PM Utkarsh Verma <utkarshverma294@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Add a new message type SYMBOLIC_PERMS under the 'Permissions'
> subsection. Octal permission bits are easier to read and understand
> instead of their symbolic macro names.
>
> Suggested-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Utkarsh Verma <utkarshverma294@xxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@xxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst | 11 +++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst
> index f0956e9ea2d8..41037594ec24 100644
> --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst
> @@ -957,6 +957,17 @@ Permissions
>      Permission bits should use 4 digit octal permissions (like 0700 or 0444).
>      Avoid using any other base like decimal.
>
> +  **SYMBOLIC_PERMS**
> +    Permission bits in the octal form are more readable and easier to
> +    understand than their symbolic counterparts because many command-line
> +    tools use this notation only. Experienced kernel developers have been using

Let's remove "only".

> +    this traditional Unix permission bits for decades and so they find it

Maybe you meant "these" here.

With these changes made,
Acked-by: Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@xxxxxxxxx>

> +    easier to understand the octal notation than the symbolic macros.
> +    For example, it is harder to read S_IWUSR|S_IRUGO than 0644, which
> +    obscures the developer's intent rather than clarifying it.
> +
> +    See: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+55aFw5v23T-zvDZp-MmD_EYxF8WbafwwB59934FV7g21uMGQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> +
>
>  Spacing and Brackets
>  --------------------
> --
> 2.25.1
>