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  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:   Sun, 24 May 2020 09:48:13 +0200
From:   Sedat Dilek <>
To:     Masahiro Yamada <>
Cc:     Nick Desaulniers <>,
        Fangrui Song <>,
        Nick Clifton <>,
        David Blaikie <>,
        Michal Marek <>,
        Andrew Morton <>,
        Changbin Du <>,
        Randy Dunlap <>,
        Stephen Rothwell <>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <>,
        Anshuman Khandual <>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,
        clang-built-linux <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Makefile: support compressed debug info

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 5:57 AM Masahiro Yamada <> wrote:
> On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 6:57 AM 'Nick Desaulniers' via Clang Built
> Linux <> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 7:48 PM Masahiro Yamada <> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Fangrui Song <>
> > >
> > >
> > > Suggested-by -> Reviewed-by
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Yes, my mistake.
> >
> > > > Suggested-by: Nick Clifton <>
> > >
> > >
> > > I do not know where this tag came from.
> > >
> > > Nick Clifton taught us the version rule of binutils,but did not state
> > > anything about this patch itself.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Sedat Dilek <>
> > >
> > > I do not see the source of this tag, either...
> >
> > Not all contributions to open source need to be in the form of
> > patches.  Both Sedat and Nick gave suggestions which ultimately
> > informed the contents of this patch.  They should be rewarded for
> > their efforts, and incentivized to help improve the code base further.
> > I think suggested by tags are a good way to do that; but if it's
> > against a written convention or if you still disagree, it's not the
> > end of the world to me, and you may drop those tags from the v3.
> Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> gives the guideline.
> "A Suggested-by: tag indicates that the patch idea is suggested by the person
> named and ensures credit to the person for the idea. Please note that this
> tag should not be added without the reporter's permission, especially if the
> idea was not posted in a public forum. That said, if we diligently credit our
> idea reporters, they will, hopefully, be inspired to help us again in the
> future."
> I think this tag should be given to people who
> gave the main idea to come up with
> the main part of the patch.
> Is that David Blaikie who suggested to
> compress the debug info ?
> If so, definitely he deserves to have Suggested-by tag.
> For the others, I do not think Suggested-by is a good fit.
> I appreciate their contribution to improve this patch.
> So, maybe you can give credit in other form, for example,
> mention it in the commit log explicitly?
> Nick Clifton helped us to provide the minimal binutils version.
> Sedat Dilet found an increase in size of debug .deb package.
> Thanks.


first my last name is Dilek - just for the sake of completeness.
No, it is not my first name as Dilek is a female Turkish first name,
so I do not want to change my gender.

So this discussions come up again and again.

Thus some own words on this - this is my personal opinion.

Like the author of Curl and DOH said at FOSDEM 2019 in Bruessel:
I am doing all this work - first - for myself - in my build and
developing environment.
Very very egoistically!

"Share knowledge aggressively!"
...was Nick's words at First ClangBuiltLinux Meetup in Zurich 2020.
In a 2nd round I share my knowledge and I like this - that's why I am
doing Open Source.

For me it sounds like a "Suggested-by" tag or other credits like
"Reviewed-by" have a higher value than a Tested-by tag.

*** The opposite is the case. ***

Here, I am on a Samsung SandyBridge CPU/GPU aka 2nd generation
ultrabook series runing Debian/testing AMD64.

A slightly modified Debian-kernel linux-config takes me approx. 5 (in
words five) hours of compiling and generating Debian packages.

Plus, testing.
Plus, testing.
Plus, testing.

In Linux-next times I run the whole Linux-Test-Project tests plus some
FIO tests.

Finally, I decide depending from what is new and interesting to me to
attend a full single Linux-kernel release cycle.
The last was Linux v5.3 which was the first release to be
compile/link-able - with no modifications - with LLVM/Clang/LLD v9.0.
For upcoming Linux v5.7 I have built each single RC Linux-kernel and
used it in my daily work!
Since RC1 - for me running on bare metal counts - checking QEMU or
other VM is nice - but showed me that says sometimes nothing.

Plus, I am building llvm-toolchains (LLVM/Clang/LLD) and testing with
them (and report if needed).

"...if we diligently credit our idea reporters, they will, hopefully,
be inspired to help us again in the future."

These are some motivating words...

My Tested-by is like a certificate - like a "Made in Germany" seal :-).

Virtual Greeting from North-West Germany,
- Sedat -

Powered by blists - more mailing lists