linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] arm64: dts: add support for NXP i.MX8MP FRDM board

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: <CAEnQRZD=h5qOC445U3_+HPh7aCE8TohSpZmg9hgkRE7mg5HUpA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 14:35:26 +0200
From: Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@...il.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, Rogerio Pimentel <rpimentel.silva@...il.com>, robh@...nel.org, 
	krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org, shawnguo@...nel.org, 
	s.hauer@...gutronix.de, kernel@...gutronix.de, 
	alexander.stein@...tq-group.com, dario.binacchi@...rulasolutions.com, 
	marex@...x.de, Markus.Niebel@...group.com, y.moog@...tec.de, 
	joao.goncalves@...adex.com, frieder.schrempf@...tron.de, josua@...id-run.com, 
	francesco.dolcini@...adex.com, primoz.fiser@...ik.com, imx@...ts.linux.dev, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Xiaofeng Wei <xiaofeng.wei@....com>, 
	Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@....com>, Joseph Guo <qijian.guo@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] arm64: dts: add support for NXP i.MX8MP FRDM board

<snip>

> > We (NXP) immensely  appreciate individual contributions from everyone.
> >
> > We need to be fair, the v1 of this patchset was taken from NXP
> > downstream without
> > respecting the Developer Certificate of Origin.
>
> No, it wasn't. Please read carefully DCO. The chain here was not
> correct, but that's the only thing.
>

Indeed carefully reading the DCO Clause b) you are right.

> >
> > E.g there were commits pulled in from our internal tree without
> > keeping the S-o-B tags.
>
> Read DCO, please. It is not mandatory to keep 3rd party SoB. It is
> perfectly fine to skip it, if needed according to (b) of DCO certifying.
>

True. In my understanding though if one bases their work on others work
they should at least keep the S-o-b tag as a common courtesy.

Commit messages explicitly says that the work is based on NXP internal
tree patches.

At this point I leave to Rogerio's appreciation on which S-o-B flags
to pull and how much
of his work is based on NXP tree.

Thanks a lot Rogerio and Krzysztof for helping move this forward.