From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7253FC433EF for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2022 11:59:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230361AbiB0MAP (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Feb 2022 07:00:15 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48174 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230351AbiB0MAL (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Feb 2022 07:00:11 -0500 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [145.40.68.75]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56FE93EA8B; Sun, 27 Feb 2022 03:59:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 064BCB80BA1; Sun, 27 Feb 2022 11:59:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 98278C340E9; Sun, 27 Feb 2022 11:59:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1645963168; bh=Te4EfTTYQsfZpMdQ0/C3rUjYwWd1sYArQ5cEdFdvC4M=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=QPjw+tWJetyGnHk46KAcGPGqRJv6t7qYDp2kM542emb3KhlJDyieuL+RXAVN8/Aoa zi7FEWdTiA2VP9RHI3Rb/W/FvzDHsBKbVuFEkiZY/hO+YiORZFt/UWsjqMM9KGTrSB TDmnSF8tRyFME4+0ihBq5zi9Su82BnFqYoE2YXmkrl5LhdYcDMKYfSAfn7GazlIMjo xIeVOZBHlJia5Kux2METCnxxRspN4vOdagIvIuUwTakco55QfQEWBDCuUNlRXzQTFz QSI9KXx56L6W177DMDKOvX465aFVBoxDZwgUxB9Q5N8QBsJMwpCEVf3fk7TRRCSLCb I8hnSHtHJ/yOA== Received: by mail-yb1-f172.google.com with SMTP id w63so15015900ybe.10; Sun, 27 Feb 2022 03:59:28 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531KdV7SOZ+LrtMWRUmFJQaU4zAiwECdL//9GFm9XkuJEsMcTSr5 IeUAWjwN4qWFGBGhWsySfilz7Bm+i1aKx+sezdQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJznAqXJuwVq3Ez/T9l0TFl0QJdnFwr9WRL1NkM4KNlK5gIAm/AQJHrpFytZuKP7tEZwvXSO9NThKidPqAjYaj4= X-Received: by 2002:a25:af8e:0:b0:622:c778:c0a2 with SMTP id g14-20020a25af8e000000b00622c778c0a2mr14794487ybh.50.1645963167624; Sun, 27 Feb 2022 03:59:27 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220226220639.1173594-1-Jason@zx2c4.com> <20220226220639.1173594-3-Jason@zx2c4.com> In-Reply-To: From: Ard Biesheuvel Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2022 12:59:15 +0100 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] ACPI: allow longer device IDs To: Alexander Graf Cc: "Jason A. Donenfeld" , Len Brown , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Crypto Mailing List , ACPI Devel Maling List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Greg Kroah-Hartman Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 27 Feb 2022 at 12:48, Alexander Graf wrote: > > > On 27.02.22 12:43, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > On Sun, 27 Feb 2022 at 12:39, Alexander Graf wrote: > >> > >> On 27.02.22 11:47, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > >>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2022 at 11:30, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > >>>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2022 at 11:03, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > >>>>> On 2/27/22, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > >>>>>> On Sat, 26 Feb 2022 at 23:07, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > >>>>>>> From: Alexander Graf > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> Please don't invent patch authors like that. Alex's patch that started > >>>>>> this discussion was completely different. > >>>>> Considering the investigative side ("why won't the _CID match?") and > >>>>> most the commit message were Alex's, and that those things comprise > >>>>> 95% of what this patch is, and that the code change itself isn't even > >>>>> part of anything Turing complete, I most certainly did not feel > >>>>> comfortable stripping Alex's authorship. Instead I added myself as a > >>>>> co-author at the bottom. When in doubt, err on the side of crediting > >>>>> others. Alex also took a look at this patch, I am under the impression > >>>>> of at least, before it went out. Let's minimize the paperwork > >>>>> policing, okay? I think it'd make for a much more pleasant space here. > >>> ... > >>>> Please stop with the ad hominems in response to criticism on factual > >>>> aspects of your code. Putting someone else's authorship on code they > >>>> did not write is not cool, and pointing that out is *not* what is > >>>> making this space unpleasant. > >>>> And 'paperwork policing' is sadly an important aspect of a high > >>>> profile open source project such as Linux. > >>>> > >>> I typed this before reading your message on IRC, which reads: > >>> > >>> "Alex looked at that patch before i sent it out and did not object to > >>> me keeping his authorship. I wouldn't have sent it out otherwise." > >>> > >>> and so I stand corrected if this is true. But please, next time, > >>> please be more clear about these things. > >> > >> Yes, he did reach out to me on a separate channel and I told him to go > >> for it :). Sorry if I created some confusion with that. > >> > > No, my bad. But in my defence, everyone on the original thread knows > > that this single oneline change was suggested by Jason, not you, and > > so seeing him posting it as your patch did confuse me a little. > > > The idea came up 1y ago in conversations with Adrian when we tried to > make _CID matching work. Unfortunately I did not file a patent for the > mechanism to increase the array size until data fits :). It's such a > revolutionary invention! > > Back to seriousness, I'm pretty indifferent on the attribution for it. > What I'm more interested in is a solution that allows us to match the > correct identifier :). My take is that Jason just wanted to be nice and > was trying to give credit. > Giving credit is nice, but I do think that obfuscating authorship like this is generally not preferred. But in this particular case, it hardly matters, so let's not debate this any further.