From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752206AbdJDN2T convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Oct 2017 09:28:19 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:51178 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752058AbdJDN2S (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Oct 2017 09:28:18 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D2CA22188A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=rostedt@goodmis.org Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 09:28:15 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Greg KH Cc: "Tobin C. Harding" , Petr Mladek , Joe Perches , Ian Campbell , Sergey Senozhatsky , kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , William Roberts , Chris Fries , Dave Weinstein Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] [RFC V2 0/6] add more kernel pointer filter options Message-ID: <20171004092815.71b6243c@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20171004124233.GA19372@kroah.com> References: <1506816410-10230-1-git-send-email-me@tobin.cc> <20171004085850.GH28247@kroah.com> <20171004105051.GE16685@eros> <20171004124233.GA19372@kroah.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.0 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 14:42:33 +0200 Greg KH wrote: > > Is correct protocol for me to add your Signed-off-by tag to each patch from this RFC? Or is the > > protocol for you to add the tag yourself when the real version is posted? > > You can add my signed-off-by to your new patches, I was always told that one should never add someone else's signed-off-by, because that's not what it means. I was told that this would be an Acked-by or Reviewed-by. >>From Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst: ==== 12) When to use Acked-by: and Cc: --------------------------------- The Signed-off-by: tag indicates that the signer was involved in the development of the patch, or that he/she was in the patch's delivery path. If a person was not directly involved in the preparation or handling of a patch but wishes to signify and record their approval of it then they can ask to have an Acked-by: line added to the patch's changelog. Acked-by: is often used by the maintainer of the affected code when that maintainer neither contributed to nor forwarded the patch. Acked-by: is not as formal as Signed-off-by:. It is a record that the acker has at least reviewed the patch and has indicated acceptance. Hence patch mergers will sometimes manually convert an acker's "yep, looks good to me" into an Acked-by: (but note that it is usually better to ask for an explicit ack). ==== -- Steve From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 09:28:15 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt Message-ID: <20171004092815.71b6243c@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20171004124233.GA19372@kroah.com> References: <1506816410-10230-1-git-send-email-me@tobin.cc> <20171004085850.GH28247@kroah.com> <20171004105051.GE16685@eros> <20171004124233.GA19372@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] [RFC V2 0/6] add more kernel pointer filter options To: Greg KH Cc: "Tobin C. Harding" , Petr Mladek , Joe Perches , Ian Campbell , Sergey Senozhatsky , kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , William Roberts , Chris Fries , Dave Weinstein List-ID: On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 14:42:33 +0200 Greg KH wrote: > > Is correct protocol for me to add your Signed-off-by tag to each patch = from this RFC? Or is the > > protocol for you to add the tag yourself when the real version is poste= d? =20 >=20 > You can add my signed-off-by to your new patches, I was always told that one should never add someone else's signed-off-by, because that's not what it means.=20 I was told that this would be an Acked-by or Reviewed-by. =46rom Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst: =3D=3D=3D=3D 12) When to use Acked-by: and Cc: --------------------------------- The Signed-off-by: tag indicates that the signer was involved in the development of the patch, or that he/she was in the patch's delivery path. If a person was not directly involved in the preparation or handling of a patch but wishes to signify and record their approval of it then they can ask to have an Acked-by: line added to the patch's changelog. Acked-by: is often used by the maintainer of the affected code when that maintainer neither contributed to nor forwarded the patch. Acked-by: is not as formal as Signed-off-by:. It is a record that the acker has at least reviewed the patch and has indicated acceptance. Hence patch mergers will sometimes manually convert an acker's "yep, looks good to me" into an Acked-by: (but note that it is usually better to ask for an explicit ack). =3D=3D=3D=3D -- Steve