linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 0/2] RISC-V: enable rust

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: <CANiq72=btcBOmrz0=ib=2eZiiV1z4_3qm1cqyw1=jUFDiJ77bg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 24 Feb 2023 23:20:34 +0100
From:   Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To:     Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
Cc:     Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
        Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
        Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
        Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/2] RISC-V: enable rust

On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 10:00 PM Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> The stuff that I have lifted here all had you as the sole author in the
> "rust" branch downstream, which is why I gave you authorship. Namely:
> afba78eacb9b ("rust: generate target specification files on the fly")
> 732b3c386328 ("rust: target: remove `cpu`")
>
> I don't see anything from [1] in these commits, so I don't think that I
> made a mistake here.

It is true that I converted the original target spec files into the
script, so I added the final lines. However, in that first commit some
of the deleted files (related to RISC-V) were created by Gary. Thus it
still feels a bit wrong to not credit Gary or even mention him.

For instance, consider an even more extreme case: somebody moving a
file or doing formatting/whitespace changes. Would they be the main
and only author?

> It's RFC for a reason, I've had a poor track record with off-list emails
> to people that do not know me so would rather do it this way :)
> Probably should have noted that I wrote the ~placeholder commit messages
> though, apologies. I'll sort that out for a potential v1.

No problem!

> That's what I did! Unless I missed something that was non-obvious, the
> only name on the commits I lifted was you. Is there somewhere else I
> should have looked for that information?

I would have traced the commits back a bit more. For instance, in the
first commit you mention above, one may see the RISC-V target files
were removed, so that means something was already there. Checking who
added those files leads to a few commits from Gary (and one from
Daniel). And then it is about making a judgement call trying to be
fair :)

Cheers,
Miguel