linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf tools: Stop depending on .git files for building PERF-VERSION-FILE

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: <caed045b-4286-3663-0e71-8a0f5f7f0bc6@tessares.net>
Date:   Wed, 30 Mar 2022 16:36:04 +0200
From:   Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@...sares.net>
To:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc:     John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>, peterz@...radead.org,
        mingo@...hat.com, mark.rutland@....com,
        alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
        namhyung@...nel.org, irogers@...gle.com,
        linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf tools: Stop depending on .git files for building
 PERF-VERSION-FILE

On 30/03/2022 16:30, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 11:28:12AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
>> Em Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 04:22:35PM +0200, Matthieu Baerts escreveu:
>>> On 30/03/2022 16:12, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>>>>> Thank you for your patch, I just tested it and it also fixes the issue I
>>>>> reported!
> 
>>>> I'm taking this as a:
> 
>>>> Tested-by: Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@...sares.net>
> 
>>>> Ok?
> 
>>> Yes, OK for me, thank you!
> 
>>> I never know what maintainers prefer when there is already a
>>> "Reported-by" tag so I didn't specify it but I will do next time.
> 
>> Right, I'll stick both R-by and T-by.
> 
>> There are cases where people just report and don't test, or just ack.
> 
> But when you actually provide the:
> 
> Tested-by: Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@...sares.net>
> 
> It makes the lives of maintainers using b4 easier, as it'll collect
> those.

I agree it is clearer having both tags.
On my side, some people are often asking not to their name in multiple
tags but instead combining tags, e.g. Reported-and-tested-by. But
Patchwork doesn't like that and I have to add the tag manually when
applying the patch. I guess many tools don't like these combined tags!

Anyway, next time I add it and let the maintainer drop / modify it if
they prefer :)

> About b4: https://people.kernel.org/monsieuricon/introducing-b4-and-patch-attestation

Excellent and very useful tool, I agree :-)

Cheers,
Matt
-- 
Tessares | Belgium | Hybrid Access Solutions
www.tessares.net