linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clocksource: shift helper

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]

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0805062242020.3318@apollo.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:	Tue, 6 May 2008 22:53:14 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, johnstul@...ibm.com,
	ralf@...ux-mips.org, anemo@....ocn.ne.jp,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clocksource: shift helper

On Tue, 6 May 2008, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 22:25 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, 6 May 2008, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 02:52 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 1 May 2008, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > This is a little helper I pulled from the mips tree.
> > > > ... 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
> > > > 
> > > > And who is the original author of this little helper in the MIPS tree?
> > > 
> > > commit 16b7b2ac0148e839da86af8747b6fa4aad43a9b7
> > > Author: Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@....ocn.ne.jp>
> > 
> > Wouldn't it be appropriate to assign the authorship in the usual form
> > i.e.:
> > 
> > From: Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@....ocn.ne.jp> 
> > 
> > on top of the patch and keep the original changelog message intact
> > including the Signed-off-by of the author and Ralf ?
> > 
> > Aside of the broken S-O-B chain this is a blatant usurpation of
> > somebody else's work.
> > 
> 
> I took a function and modified it for my usage, which happens all the
> time.

And your description led me to the assumption that the code was pulled
from the MIPS git tree and not from the MIPS architecture code in
mainline. Everyone else I talked to was having the same impression.

I was wrong, but can you understand that your sloppy wording "pulled
from the MIPS tree" along with the fact that you just copied code
instead of moving it into the generic space and cleanup the MIPS code
where it is duplicated from is causing such a misunderstanding ?

I'm fine with the change itself, but it needs to move the code out of
MIPS in the first place and not just duplicating code for no good
reason.

Thanks,
	tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/