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]

Date:   Sat, 25 Feb 2023 09:20:40 +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 11:32 PM Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> It was a few hours ago that I looked properly, but, IIRC, it was a
> conversion from config files to code? My understanding was that
> config files were not copyrightable, hence I looked only at the
> authorship of the code. I'm usually on the anal side about SoB stuff,
> so it is not a matter of me not bothering!

It is not so much about copyright, but about crediting people fairly.
Gary has done a significant amount of the work that eventually became
part of the patches here, and I would have sent the patch with at
least a `Co-developed-by` from him.

Not to mention every commit in the kernel has a SoB, regardless of
what files are modified -- I would not remove a SoB from somebody else
when forwarding a patch even if they were all non-copyrightable files.

Cheers,
Miguel