From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82FC73C1F; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 21:21:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749676908; cv=none; b=OE8xmeTFr4x0tikpNCdY7dfLKEg5wWzz7jEyXXPbvGYs2kbsFEVc40yW/tHq6WuAabJXQirziICJc5xmfVsaAyyl+SL2QumfG/6bUdAK2d4D0ChcWcgkhZqqPJ9VHW/cA5ZN4jfKXglbLjCVIn50uH/NyYWHdpFHHHKkp+7vC/g= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749676908; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wSMLjnF4pKnpfzQ8bFRhw7tIJS06byplGjawAcKIzzU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=SKvjRyH1Y+dN84yvKAEZyXpMJ1DbiFVeIVf3MBJFWHSuVwtb9wdhrhUGq9I/uuCz50S58vPZ4/Htbc6EHdzlPUKiw8Ma3ryo7rn3/rE4W1JfKcDFqCR5gpJDy8ar/zLmf2ezxEpP9tgrPbB4cqGJvo3Uhnujp4Y3vIzQVUbWu9M= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=OTSRUEzC; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="OTSRUEzC" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D853FC4CEE3; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 21:21:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1749676908; bh=wSMLjnF4pKnpfzQ8bFRhw7tIJS06byplGjawAcKIzzU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=OTSRUEzCXgmDlV3m3QtQT20fJPvNpen1FjCqD4ysMWKuFWjzimOKnySKlHyk5kYzW SeGHos3mjXNnm3D5nAfJBPR+cOnCENdcxTSnsEZ6/6VbI+TfnlITTw4EXqWcJVVfSC nJp6T6ny03ByAes9uo52wHQuP6foUMSXaBcO+4IAnMub0GvisoWLmkm7m/EDHcMSca CAr0wXqUjdmgPh3jYHd6ybotbrjDBrkBM25mrbek3GMo9Y7mixVh8+iF+gV+PQYQBi b93kONbDqb/t09IgDC0qlv4xBpkYMFTwuDP/sZtxvq151C6sRKL/nZYPdAydbSWlSi HuQ4KwqHgasqA== Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 23:21:42 +0200 From: Danilo Krummrich To: phasta@kernel.org, Tvrtko Ursulin Cc: Lyude Paul , David Airlie , Simona Vetter , Matthew Brost , Christian =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=F6nig?= , Maarten Lankhorst , Maxime Ripard , Thomas Zimmermann , Sumit Semwal , Pierre-Eric Pelloux-Prayer , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] drm/sched: Avoid memory leaks by canceling job-by-job Message-ID: References: <20250603093130.100159-2-phasta@kernel.org> <8256799772c200103124c0c10490a9c1db04e355.camel@mailbox.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8256799772c200103124c0c10490a9c1db04e355.camel@mailbox.org> > On Tue, 2025-06-03 at 13:27 +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > On 03/06/2025 10:31, Philipp Stanner wrote: > > What I am not that ecstatic about is only getting the Suggested-by > > credit in 1/6. Given it is basically my patch with some cosmetic > > changes > > like the kernel doc and the cancel loop extracted to a helper. > > Sign the patch off and I give you the authorship if you want. AFAICS, the proposal of having cancel_job() has been a review comment which has been clarified with a reference patch. IMO, the fact that after some discussion Philipp decided to go with this suggestion and implement the suggestion in his patch series does not result in an obligation for him to hand over authorship of the patch he wrote to the person who suggested the change in the context of the code review. Anyways, it seems that Philipp did offer it however, so this seems to be resolved?