From b99b06ddd6f88a37a6ede6442b8f9e7f23046b4a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Martin Berger Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2022 14:04:41 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Added notes about copyright headers in code, and a reminder that pull-requests ideally come with an explanation how the correctness of the PR was established. --- CODE_STYLE.md | 2 ++ CONTRIBUTING.md | 7 +++++++ 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+) diff --git a/CODE_STYLE.md b/CODE_STYLE.md index 37ee977cf..48df5adb9 100644 --- a/CODE_STYLE.md +++ b/CODE_STYLE.md @@ -48,6 +48,8 @@ Formatting * When modifying existing code that does not conform to this style, prefer matching the existing style +* Files should have suitable copyright headers. + Implementation -------------- diff --git a/CONTRIBUTING.md b/CONTRIBUTING.md index c960ae6c3..0465fb324 100644 --- a/CONTRIBUTING.md +++ b/CONTRIBUTING.md @@ -20,3 +20,10 @@ Unnecessary code churn should be avoided unless as part of a pull request aimed at improving code quality, such as fixing repeated code style violations or renaming a function whose meaning is unclear. Such pull requests should not also introduce significant new functionality. + +It is desirable in a pull request to explain how the code presented +has been verified and how the verification has been made +reproducible. Ideally the pull request is accompanied by some form of +automated verification that is presented in a way that the reviewers +of the pull request can run. It is desirable that the pull request +explains how it relates to the existing RISC-V architectural tests.