linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] drm/amd/amdgpu: Properly tune the size of struct

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <93d10611-9fbb-4242-87b8-5860b2606042@suswa.mountain>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 09:10:24 -0500
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
To: WangYuli <wangyuli@...ontech.com>
Cc: alexander.deucher@....com, christian.koenig@....com, Xinhui.Pan@....com,
	airlied@...il.com, daniel@...ll.ch, Jingwen.Chen2@....com,
	suhui@...china.com, bokun.zhang@....com, chongli2@....com,
	Luqmaan.Irshad@....com, amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	guanwentao@...ontech.com, shaoyang@...ontech.com,
	hongao@...ontech.com, wenlunpeng <wenlunpeng@...ontech.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drm/amd/amdgpu: Properly tune the size of struct

On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 10:00:00PM +0800, WangYuli wrote:
> The struct assertion is failed because sparse cannot parse
> `#pragma pack(push, 1)` and `#pragma pack(pop)` correctly.
> GCC's output is still 1-byte-aligned. No harm to memory layout.
> 
> The error can be filtered out by sparse-diff, but sometimes
> multiple lines queezed into one, making the sparse-diff thinks
> its a new error. I'm trying to aviod this by fixing errors.
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230620045919.492128-1-suhui@nfschina.com/
> Fixes: 1721bc1b2afa ("drm/amdgpu: Update VF2PF interface")
> Signed-off-by: Su Hui <suhui@...china.com>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
> Signed-off-by: wenlunpeng <wenlunpeng@...ontech.com>
> Signed-off-by: WangYuli <wangyuli@...ontech.com>
> ---

Thanks for doing this, but these Signed-off-by tags aren't correct.
Signed-off-by is like signing a legal document.  It came out of the SCO
lawsuits.  SCO was a scam where SCO claimed that Linux stole their
source code and tried to get Linux users to pay licensing fees.  (No one
stole anything and SCO didn't even own the copyrights to Unix, those
belonged to IBM).

You could maybe use the Reported-by: or Suggested-by: tags for Su Hui.
But the rest of us could just be Cc:

Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
Cc: wenlunpeng <wenlunpeng@...ontech.com>
Reported-by: Su Hui <suhui@...china.com>
Signed-off-by: WangYuli <wangyuli@...ontech.com>


regards,
dan carpenter