linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the powerpc tree

linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the powerpc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 311 bytes --]

Hi all,

Commits

  03a2e65f54b3 ("KVM: PPC: Book3S Nested: Use explicit 4096 LPID maximum")
  18827eeef022 ("KVM: PPC: Remove kvmppc_claim_lpid")

are missing a Signed-off-by from their authors.

The first is just "Signed-of-by" misspelling.  The second is missing.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the powerpc tree

[Nicholas Piggin]

Excerpts from Stephen Rothwell's message of May 20, 2022 8:31 am:
> Hi all,
> 
> Commits
> 
>   03a2e65f54b3 ("KVM: PPC: Book3S Nested: Use explicit 4096 LPID maximum")
>   18827eeef022 ("KVM: PPC: Remove kvmppc_claim_lpid")
> 
> are missing a Signed-off-by from their authors.

Sorry.

> The first is just "Signed-of-by" misspelling.  The second is missing.

My laptop's 'f' key has got much worse since then :(

Thanks,
Nick

linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the powerpc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 229 bytes --]

Hi all,

Commit

  351a050f602d ("Revert "powerpc: add `cur_cpu_spec` symbol to vmcoreinfo"")

is missing a Signed-off-by from its author and committer.

Reverts are commits as well ...

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the powerpc tree

[Michael Ellerman]

Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> writes:
> Hi all,
>
> Commit
>
>   351a050f602d ("Revert "powerpc: add `cur_cpu_spec` symbol to vmcoreinfo"")
>
> is missing a Signed-off-by from its author and committer.
>
> Reverts are commits as well ...

Thanks, fixed.

cheers

linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the powerpc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 200 bytes --]

Hi all,

Commit

  77bbbc0cf848 ("KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Fix TLB management on SMT8 POWER9 and POWER10 processors")

is missing a Signed-off-by from its author.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the powerpc tree

[Michael Ellerman]

Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> writes:
> Hi all,
>
> Commit
>
>   77bbbc0cf848 ("KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Fix TLB management on SMT8 POWER9 and POWER10 processors")
>
> is missing a Signed-off-by from its author.

That was actually deliberate.

Suraj wrote the patch when he was at IBM, but never sent it.

Paul & Nick then resurrected it from some internal tree, and are now
submitting it on behalf of IBM.

So they are asserting option b) of the DCO AIUI:

  (b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
      of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
      license and I have the right under that license to submit that
      work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
      by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
      permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
      in the file


cheers

linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the powerpc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 166 bytes --]

Hi all,

Commit

  04a1942933ce ("powerpc/mm: Fix hugetlb page initialization")

is missing a Signed-off-by from its author.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the powerpc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 247 bytes --]

Hi all,

Commit

  f68e7927212f ("Revert "powerpc/book3s32: Reorder _PAGE_XXX flags to simplify TLB handling"")

is missing a Signed-off-by from its author and committer.

Reverts are commits as well :-)

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the powerpc tree

[Michael Ellerman]

Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> writes:

> Hi all,
>
> Commit
>
>   f68e7927212f ("Revert "powerpc/book3s32: Reorder _PAGE_XXX flags to simplify TLB handling"")
>
> is missing a Signed-off-by from its author and committer.
>
> Reverts are commits as well :-)

But do they need SOBs?

The DCO says:

By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:

        (a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
            have the right to submit it under the open source license
            indicated in the file; or

        (b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
            of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
            license and I have the right under that license to submit that
            work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
            by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
            permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
            in the file; or

        (c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
            person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified
            it.

        (d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution
            are public and that a record of the contribution (including all
            personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is
            maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with
            this project or the open source license(s) involved.


Only d) really applies to a revert, and as the maintainer I feel like d)
is kind of implied.

Anyway I'll try and remember to do it in future if that's The Rule ;)

cheers

Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the powerpc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1907 bytes --]

Hi Michael,

On Sun, 24 Feb 2019 22:48:57 +1100 Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
>
> But do they need SOBs?

I think so, since they modify the code ..

> The DCO says:
> 
> By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:
> 
>         (a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
>             have the right to submit it under the open source license
>             indicated in the file; or
> 
>         (b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
>             of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
>             license and I have the right under that license to submit that
>             work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
>             by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
>             permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
>             in the file; or
> 
>         (c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
>             person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified
>             it.
> 
>         (d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution
>             are public and that a record of the contribution (including all
>             personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is
>             maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with
>             this project or the open source license(s) involved.
> 
> 
> Only d) really applies to a revert, and as the maintainer I feel like d)
> is kind of implied.

I read this as (a || b || c) && d.  And if there is no SOB, then none
of the above is certified.

> Anyway I'll try and remember to do it in future if that's The Rule ;)

Its just as effective as the rest of our rules ... i.e. a strong
suggestion :-)

Thanks
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the powerpc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 184 bytes --]

Hi all,

Commit

  cb3d6759a93c ("powerpc/64s: Enable barrier_nospec based on firmware settings")

is missing a Signed-off-by from its author.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the powerpc tree

[Michael Ellerman]

Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> writes:

> Hi all,
>
> Commit
>
>   cb3d6759a93c ("powerpc/64s: Enable barrier_nospec based on firmware settings")
>
> is missing a Signed-off-by from its author.

Sorry my fault.

cheers

linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the powerpc tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

Commit

  f23ab3efb1b3 ("powerpc: Fix DABR match on hash based systems")

is missing a Signed-off-by from its committer.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the powerpc tree

[Michael Ellerman]

Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> writes:

> Hi all,
>
> Commit
>
>   f23ab3efb1b3 ("powerpc: Fix DABR match on hash based systems")
>
> is missing a Signed-off-by from its committer.

Crud. Hoist on my own petard as they say.

cheers