From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on archive.lwn.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.7 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by archive.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48B9A7D2F0 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 13:17:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726465AbfF0NRf (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jun 2019 09:17:35 -0400 Received: from mga18.intel.com ([134.134.136.126]:49336 "EHLO mga18.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726059AbfF0NRe (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jun 2019 09:17:34 -0400 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by orsmga106.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Jun 2019 06:17:33 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.63,423,1557212400"; d="scan'208";a="361147600" Received: from unknown (HELO jsakkine-mobl1) ([10.252.36.47]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 27 Jun 2019 06:17:29 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/2] fTPM: firmware TPM running in TEE From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: Sasha Levin Cc: peterhuewe@gmx.de, jgg@ziepe.ca, corbet@lwn.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@microsoft.com, thiruan@microsoft.com, bryankel@microsoft.com, tee-dev@lists.linaro.org, ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org, sumit.garg@linaro.org, rdunlap@infradead.org Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:17:29 +0300 In-Reply-To: <20190626235653.GL7898@sasha-vm> References: <20190625201341.15865-1-sashal@kernel.org> <20190625201341.15865-2-sashal@kernel.org> <673dd30d03e8ed9825bb46ef21b2efef015f6f2a.camel@linux.intel.com> <20190626235653.GL7898@sasha-vm> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.32.1-2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2019-06-26 at 19:56 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: > > You've used so much on this so shouldn't this have that somewhat new > > co-developed-by tag? I'm also wondering can this work at all > > Honestly, I've just been massaging this patch more than "authoring" it. > If you feel strongly about it feel free to add a Co-authored patch with > my name, but in my mind this is just Thiru's work. This is just my subjective view but writing code is easier than making it work in the mainline in 99% of cases. If this patch was doing something revolutional, lets say a new outstanding scheduling algorithm, then I would think otherwise. It is not. You without question deserve both credit and also the blame (if this breaks everything) :-) > > process-wise if the original author of the patch is also the only tester > > of the patch? > > There's not much we can do about this... Linaro folks have tested this > without the fTPM firmware, so at the very least it won't explode for > everyone. If for some reason non-microsoft folks see issues then we can > submit patches on top to fix this, we're not just throwing this at you > and running away. So why any of those Linaro folks can't do it? I can add after tested-by tag parentheses something explaining that context of testing. It is reasonable given the circumstances. I can also give an explanation in my next PR along the lines what you are saying. This would definitely work for me. /Jarkko