linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Update MAX77802 PMIC entry

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 16 May 2017 08:51:40 +0100
From:   Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@...hile0.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Update MAX77802 PMIC entry

On Sun, 14 May 2017, Mark Brown wrote:

> On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 12:36:25AM -0400, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> 
> > Acked-by: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
> 
> Since I'm expected to apply this I wouldn't normally expect to see my
> ack - like I say if I'm acking something for me it's normally because I
> expect someone else to actually apply it (that's the standard thing).

I don't agree with this.  You provided your Ack under the assumption
that it would be applied though another tree, but there is no reason
why it would be dropped just because that is no longer the case.

It's commonplace for me to provide Acks for patches I know will
*eventually* be applied by me.  Removing them when applying patches is
part of my daily routine.

TL;DR:  If a Maintainer (or anyone for that matter) provides a *-by
tag, it should be carried forward with the (unchanged) patch until
acceptance.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog