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, 21 Jun 2017 11:33:59 -0300
From:   Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:     Milian Wolff <milian.wolff@...b.com>
Cc:     Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Mark Wielaard <mark@...mp.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] perf: libdw support for powerpc [ping]

Em Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 04:19:11PM +0200, Milian Wolff escreveu:
> On Mittwoch, 21. Juni 2017 14:48:29 CEST Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 10:16:56AM +0200, Milian Wolff escreveu:
> > > On Mittwoch, 21. Juni 2017 03:07:39 CEST Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > > Hi Millian, can I take this as an Acked-by or Tested-by?
> > > 
> > > I have no access to any PowerPC hardware. In principle the code looks
> > > fine, but that's all I can say here.
> > 
> > Ok, that would count as an Acked-by, i.e. from
> > Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:
> > 
> > -------------------------
> > 
> > Acked-by: is not as formal as Signed-off-by:.  It is a record that the acker
> > has at least reviewed the patch and has indicated acceptance.  Hence patch
> > mergers will sometimes manually convert an acker's "yep, looks good to me"
> > into an Acked-by: (but note that it is usually better to ask for an
> > explicit ack).
> > 
> > -------------------------
> > 
> > If you had a ppc machine _and_ had applied and tested the patch, that
> > would allow us to use a Tested-by tag.
> 
> I see, I'm still unfamiliar with this process. But yes, do consider it an 
> `Acked-by` from my side then.

Right, then there is another tag there that is relevant to this
discussion:

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1496312681-20133-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com

which will has the Message-ID of the message with this patch, embedded
in a URL that when clicked will bring you to the thread where the patch
was submitted and the acks, tested-by, reviewed-by, etc were provided,
so that we can go back and check the history of the patch.

- Arnaldo

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ