linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 01/29] asm-generic: add generic futex for !CONFIG

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2108931.btbn8ltBxI@wuerfel>
Date:	Fri, 26 Sep 2014 15:33:50 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Tobias Klauser <tklauser@...tanz.ch>
Cc:	Ley Foon Tan <lftan@...era.com>,
	Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	Chung-Lin Tang <cltang@...esourcery.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/29] asm-generic: add generic futex for !CONFIG_SMP

On Friday 26 September 2014 15:17:46 Tobias Klauser wrote:
> Speaking of the nios2 part: I'm the author of some parts of this code,
> but now also reviewed this series (or rather, intend to do so for the
> few remaining patches I didn't review yet).
> 
> What is the appropriate way to account for this? Is Reviewed-By still OK? I
> guess I won't be considered an entirely neutral reviewer 
> 

I think Reviewed-by is fine here, ideally mention in the full text
description who wrote what.

	Arnd
--
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/