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: <a6dfe760-c3b4-8bc4-3c7f-cc1208b626fa@suse.cz>
Date:   Wed, 9 Dec 2020 09:45:03 +0100
From:   Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org" 
        <ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] crediting bug reports and fixes folded into
 original patch

On 12/9/20 8:58 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 09:01:49PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
>> On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 16:34 -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
>> 
>> > If not "Adjusted-by", what about "Tweaked-by", "Helped-by",
>> > "Corrected-by"?
>> 
>> Improved-by: / Enhanced-by: / Revisions-by: 
>> 
> 
> I don't think we should give any credit for improvements or enhancements,

Well, some are actually useful and not about reviewer's preferred style :) But
if an author redoes the patch as a result, it's their choice to mention useful
improvements in the next version's change log.

> only for fixes.  Complaining about style is its own reward.

Right, let's focus on fixes and reports of bugs, that would have resulted in a
standalone commit, but don't.

> Having to redo a patch is already a huge headache.  Normally, I already
> considered the reviewer's prefered style and decided I didn't like it.
> Then to make me redo the patch in an ugly style and say thankyou on
> top of that???  Forget about it.  Plus, as a reviewer I hate reviewing
> patches over and over.
> 
> I've argued for years that we should have a Fixes-from: tag.  The zero

Standardizing the Fixes-from: tag (or any better name) would be a forward
progress, yes.

> day bot is already encouraging people to add Reported-by tags for this
> and a lot of people do.

"Reported-by:" becomes ambiguous once the bugfix for the reported issue in the
patch is folded, as it's no longer clear whether the bot reported the original
issue the patch is fixing, or a bug in the fix. So we should have a different
variant. "Fixes-reported-by:" so it has the same prefix?

> regards,
> dan carpenter
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ