linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] libata: Prepare for hard drives w/ non-512 sector sizes

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:	Wed, 08 Apr 2009 15:08:14 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
CC:	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata: Prepare for hard drives w/ non-512 sector sizes

Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 02:47:43PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 02:59:55AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>>> I checked this into libata-dev.git#sectsize and #NEXT...  comments
>>>> welcome.  It's willy's patch, cut down such that it introduces no
>>>> major behavior changes [READ CAPACITY improves slightly].
>>> Umm.  If you wanted me to split the patch up, why didn't you ask?
>> I've had trouble until recently simply getting you to post patches at 
>> all.  It was faster and simpler for me to do it myself.
> 
> ?!  Are you referring to the one incident where you asked me if I had
> any patches for 2.6.30, I pointed at the TRIM patches and you quibbled
> that I hadn't reposted the updates, only a git tree?

On multiple occasions.  You're the only one I have to poke to get 
updates on pending libata patches, in some cases, patches that really 
should have gone upstream long ago.


>>> I really do think I should be credited as 'Author' here.  You credit me
>>> in the patch description, but the automated tools don't show that.
>> If that is your preference, that's fine.  I did it this way to avoid 
>> your taking the blame for anything I did, while still noting in the 
>> patch description you did the original work.
> 
> Yes, that's my preference.  It's also the documented way to do things in
> SubmittingPatches.

The patch was changed from your original work, in several places.  That 
makes the issue of From header not so clear cut.  See what I said about 
blame etc. in the original email :)  If there were bugs in my changes, 
you would probably be annoyed to get bug reports about that :)

	Jeff


--
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/