linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 01/10] fs: common implementation of file type

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAOQ4uxjyTtjPk1OaWCSKs3Larqog+vmqLSth1kKWdOA5oRTtAA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 Oct 2018 12:44:50 +0300
From:   Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
To:     Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk>
Cc:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 01/10] fs: common implementation of file type

On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 12:31 PM Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 12:20:14PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 11:21 AM Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk> wrote:
> > > Dear Amir,
> > >
> > > Yes, I applied each patch manually to my tree, fixed it up where needed,
> > > then after rebuilding and testing each one I committed it and regenerated
> > > each patch. Thank you very much for your advice, I will take it into
> > > account and make the necessary changes. In the meantime, do I add other
> > > tags in the order they are received also (such as Reviewed-by:) and am
> > > I safe to add these in when I re-send the patches with the changes you
> > > and others have suggested (or would that offend people that have
> > > offered the tags)?
> > >
> >
> > Reviewed-by before of after Signed-off-by.
> > I prefer Signed-off-by last which conceptually covers the entire patch,
> > the commit message including all the review tags that you may have added.
> >
> > Some developers add Reviewed-by after Signed-off-by signifying the
> > order that things happened, so choose your own preference.
> >
> > As a reviewer, and I speak only for myself, if I offered my Reviewed-by
> > I expect it to be removed if a future revision of the patch has changed
> > so I have an indication of patches that I need to re-review.
> > But if the patch changed very lightly, like small edits to commit message
> > and code nits in general, that would not invalidate my review.
> > When in doubt, you can always explicitly ask the reviewer.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Amir.
>
> Dear Amir,
>
> Thanks - I am just going to fix up the commit messages as you suggested
> using git am etc. The content of the patches themselves will not change
> (until further feedback is received).
>

Well, I did request to change some content (the location and the comment
above BUILD_BUG_ON section) which is relevant for several patches.
However, so far affected patched did not get any Reviewed-by.

Thanks,
Amir.