From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933522Ab2JWWdS (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:33:18 -0400 Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:47459 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757443Ab2JWWdN (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:33:13 -0400 Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 00:33:05 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Eric Dumazet cc: Stanislav Kinsbursky , peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, devel@openvz.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xemul@parallels.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] posix timers: allocate timer id per process In-Reply-To: <1351029216.6537.3.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Message-ID: References: <20121023073913.23514.87934.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <1350978723.8609.1555.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <1351029216.6537.3.camel@edumazet-glaptop> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 23 Oct 2012, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 23:47 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > Not so good to me. > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet > > > > And that should be either an Acked-by or a Reviewed-by. You can't sign > > off on patches which have not been submitted or transported by you. > > I actually gave some input, provided a hash function, and so on. > > So this SOB was valid. I do that all the time. Not really. I recommend you to read the relevant file in Documentation which covers what can have your SOB. Your input is documented in the mail thread, but it does not contain a patch - which is Signed-off-by YOU - on which the thing at hand is based on. So it's not covered by what SOB actually means. You can rightfully request the patch author to add a "Suggested-by" tag, but you can't rightfully claim authorship of something you did not author. > And yes, there are bugs in this patch, as many patches that were merged > in linux tree, included by you. That's a totally different issue. We can ack/review/signoff and commit totally bogus patches as long as we want. Though that does not change the meanings of the tags (Acked, Reviewed, Signed-off) at all. Thanks, tglx