linux-kernel - Re: process? [Re: Crypto Fixes for 4.19]

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: <06e6fac1-6011-7117-454f-af930a288d75@infradead.org>
Date:   Wed, 19 Sep 2018 09:48:42 -0700
From:   Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: process? [Re: Crypto Fixes for 4.19]

On 9/19/18 9:40 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 09:10:55AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> On 9/19/18 6:23 AM, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 02:22:01PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
>>>> Hi Greg: 
>>>>
>>>> This push fixes a potential boot hang in ccp and an incorrect
>>>> CPU capability check in aegis/morus on x86.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please pull from
>>>>
>>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/herbert/crypto-2.6.git linus
>>>
>>> Now pulled, thanks.
>>>
>>> greg k-h
>>
>> Hi,
>> Just a process question:
>>
>> It looks like Greg is not adding Signed-of-by: <himself>
>> to mainline git commits, although the prior mainline git committer did so.
>>
>> Is that omission on purpose?
> 
> s-o-b does not get added to git pulls, I "trust" the subsystem
> maintainer got it correct.  That's what Linus has always done in the
> past, what am I doing differently here?
> 
>> submitting-patches.rst says:
>> The Signed-off-by: tag indicates that the signer was involved in the
>> development of the patch, or that he/she was in the patch's delivery path.
> 
> Yes, but not for git pulls.
> 
> I have not applied any patches sent in emails at this point in time, so
> there's nothing that I could have even signed off on.

OK, I see.

> confused,

no, that's me :)


thanks,
-- 
~Randy