linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched/numa: do not balance tasks onto isolated cpus

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: <20180724090651.GK2494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Tue, 24 Jul 2018 11:06:51 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     jiang.biao2@....com.cn
Cc:     chen.lin130@....com.cn, mingo@...hat.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, zhong.weidong@....com.cn,
        tan.hu@....com.cn.cn, cheng.lin130@....com.cn, tan.hu@....com.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/numa: do not balance tasks onto isolated cpus

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 09:11:37AM +0800, jiang.biao2@....com.cn wrote:

> >> Signed-off-by: Cheng Lin <cheng.lin130@....com.cn>
> >> Signed-off-by: Tan Hu <tan.hu@....com.cn>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jiang Biao <jiang.biao2@....com.cn>
> > 
> >This SoB chain is invalid.

> Mm, we don't quite understand what the *Signed-off-by* precisely means,
> Does it only mean DCO(developer certificate of origin)?
> As we understood, multiple SoBs could be used to indicate co-authors.
> If SoB only means DCO, how can the patches reflect co-authors?

It specifically does not allow for co-authorship. I think there's a
Co-Authored-by: tag invented by some people (check the git logs) but
especially for such a dinky little patch, I wouldn't bother. Maybe have
your co-workers review the patch or something.