netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v6 04/23] zinc: ChaCha20 x86

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, 29 Sep 2018 10:00:29 +0200
From:   Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Samuel Neves <sneves@....uc.pt>,
        Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Jean-Philippe Aumasson <jeanphilippe.aumasson@...il.com>,
        Andy Polyakov <appro@...nssl.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 04/23] zinc: ChaCha20 x86_64 implementation

On 29 September 2018 at 09:56, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 04:01:53AM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>> I was wondering about the ordering of these, actually. I've seen s-o-b
>> on top and s-o-b on bottom of the cc list in lots of commits and
>> haven't yet divined the One True Position.
>
> Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
>
> section 12, first sentence.
>
> The SOB chain needs to clearly express the path of the patch from
> author(s) to the upstream kernel.
>

Note that this is the author of the *patch* not necessarily the author
of the code.

Anyone is free to submit patches adding code authored by others as
long as the author has made it available under a suitable license, and
this is actually the whole point of the S-o-B: you are stating to the
next guy that the code included in your patch was made available to
you under a compatible license.