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: <201807250830037580322@zte.com.cn>
Date:   Wed, 25 Jul 2018 08:30:03 +0800 (CST)
From:   <jiang.biao2@....com.cn>
To:     <peterz@...radead.org>
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

Hi,
> 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.
I do find some(very few) Co-Authored-by in git logs, and we'll try to avoid
using that. Sometimes little patches may include much background work of
different people.:) 
Thanks lot.

Jiang,
Regard