Re: [PATCH v2] certs/extract-cert: Fix checkpatch issues

[Dan Carpenter]

On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 07:28:52PM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 02, 2023 at 10:59:02AM +0200, Franziska Naepelt wrote:
> > The following issues are fixed:
> > - WARNING: Missing or malformed SPDX-License-Identifier tag
> > - ERROR: trailing statements should be on next line
> > - WARNING: braces {} are not necessary for single statement blocks
> > - ERROR: space required before the open parenthesis '('
> > - ERROR: code indent should use tabs where possible
> > - WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
> > - WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
> 
> Again, write the patch description in imperative mood (e.g. "Do foo").
> 

Why do you care about imperative tense?  Imperative tense doesn't
matter.  What matters is that you can understand the issue and how it
looks like to the user.  I was working with a group of foreign students
and it was painful to see the contortions that they went through to make
a commit message imperative.  It's like saying "Bake a cake", "Ok, now
bake it while juggling."  The cake ends up worse.  And the commit
message end up worse when we force nonsense rules like this.

That said the rest of your comments are correct.

Franziska, I kind of feel like you should start in drivers/staging/
because you're sending beginner patches to kind of core parts of the
kernel where people are busy.  Most likely your going to have to send a
bunch of iterations of the patch.  In drivers/staging/ we don't mind
reviewing newbie patches.

regards,
dan carpenter