From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753153Ab1LFSWQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2011 13:22:16 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:37533 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753113Ab1LFSWP (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2011 13:22:15 -0500 Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 19:20:35 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Nick Bowler Cc: Ben Hutchings , mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [tip:core/locking] lockdep, rtmutex, bug: Show taint flags on error Message-ID: <20111206182035.GA12094@elte.hu> References: <1319773015.6759.30.camel@deadeye> <1323185640.7454.269.camel@deadeye> <20111206175443.GB25031@elte.hu> <20111206181422.GA11881@elliptictech.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111206181422.GA11881@elliptictech.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.3.1 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Nick Bowler wrote: > > Your original patch did two things. Peter did the sensible > > thing: he split out the print_kernel_ident() changes from > > your patch which stand on their own and kept your authorship > > in place - that is what the above patch does. > > In which case, the changelog should have been amended to state > that it's a modification of Ben's original submission. Which is what i said in my reply to Alan: | What Peter probably could have done is to add one more line | before his SOB: | | [ split out the patch from the original submission ] | Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra | | Otherwise Ben Hutchings's objection here makes little sense. No line of code was added by Peter - it's all Ben's changes. Note that the commit in question: fbdc4b9a6c29: lockdep, rtmutex, bug: Show taint flags on error is actually a good one and i think even Ben actually thinks those changes are good. Nothing was added - Ben only wants *more* to be done in a single patch and is being silly about the SOB and is asking it to be removed. Thanks, Ingo