linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commits in the bpf-next tree

linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commits in the bpf-next tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 429 bytes --]

Hi all,

Commits

  3bdc28aa2340 ("selftests/bpf: add btf annotations for cgroup_local_storage maps")
  1dfd1959fed4 ("bpf: add bpffs pretty print for cgroup local storage maps")
  3adc62d9a5be ("bpf: pass struct btf pointer to the map_check_btf() callback")
  9cf3a785dc4c ("selftests/bpf: use __bpf_constant_htons in test_prog.c")

are missing a Signed-off-by from their committers.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commits in the bpf-next tree

[Alexei Starovoitov]

On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 07:32:45AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Commits
> 
>   3bdc28aa2340 ("selftests/bpf: add btf annotations for cgroup_local_storage maps")
>   1dfd1959fed4 ("bpf: add bpffs pretty print for cgroup local storage maps")
>   3adc62d9a5be ("bpf: pass struct btf pointer to the map_check_btf() callback")
>   9cf3a785dc4c ("selftests/bpf: use __bpf_constant_htons in test_prog.c")
> 
> are missing a Signed-off-by from their committers.

the must be a script mistake?

I clearly see SOBs for all of them.

Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commits in the bpf-next tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1392 bytes --]

Hi Alexei,

On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 12:53:11 -0800 Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 07:32:45AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Commits
> > 
> >   3bdc28aa2340 ("selftests/bpf: add btf annotations for cgroup_local_storage maps")
> >   1dfd1959fed4 ("bpf: add bpffs pretty print for cgroup local storage maps")
> >   3adc62d9a5be ("bpf: pass struct btf pointer to the map_check_btf() callback")
> >   9cf3a785dc4c ("selftests/bpf: use __bpf_constant_htons in test_prog.c")
> > 
> > are missing a Signed-off-by from their committers.  
> 
> the must be a script mistake?
> 
> I clearly see SOBs for all of them.

For example:

commit 3bdc28aa2340bf1e5af753287b373522bd1c02a9 (bpf-next/master)
Author: Roman Gushchin <guroan@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon Dec 10 15:43:02 2018 -0800

    selftests/bpf: add btf annotations for cgroup_local_storage maps
    
    Add btf annotations to cgroup local storage maps (per-cpu and shared)
    in the network packet counting example.
    
    Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
    Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
    Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
    Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
    Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>

But it was committed by you, not Daniel.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commits in the bpf-next tree

[Alexei Starovoitov]

On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 09:48:20AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Alexei,
> 
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 12:53:11 -0800 Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 07:32:45AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > Commits
> > > 
> > >   3bdc28aa2340 ("selftests/bpf: add btf annotations for cgroup_local_storage maps")
> > >   1dfd1959fed4 ("bpf: add bpffs pretty print for cgroup local storage maps")
> > >   3adc62d9a5be ("bpf: pass struct btf pointer to the map_check_btf() callback")
> > >   9cf3a785dc4c ("selftests/bpf: use __bpf_constant_htons in test_prog.c")
> > > 
> > > are missing a Signed-off-by from their committers.  
> > 
> > the must be a script mistake?
> > 
> > I clearly see SOBs for all of them.
> 
> For example:
> 
> commit 3bdc28aa2340bf1e5af753287b373522bd1c02a9 (bpf-next/master)
> Author: Roman Gushchin <guroan@gmail.com>
> Date:   Mon Dec 10 15:43:02 2018 -0800
> 
>     selftests/bpf: add btf annotations for cgroup_local_storage maps
>     
>     Add btf annotations to cgroup local storage maps (per-cpu and shared)
>     in the network packet counting example.
>     
>     Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
>     Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
>     Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
>     Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
>     Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
> 
> But it was committed by you, not Daniel.

since there were only 4 commits I fixed them up manually.
But this approach doesn't scale.
We do rebase our trees when we need to fixup or drop patches and
at any given point a number of commits will be committed by me
and another set by Daniel. When we rebase we cannot keep adding
our SOBs to the other person SOBs.
Then comes the next rebase and we get to the point of
double and triple SOBs ?

I think you need to adjust the script to something like:
SOBs by Daniel | Alexei == commit by Daniel | Alexei
in bpf and bpf-next trees.

Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commits in the bpf-next tree

[Bart Van Assche]

On Wed, 2018-12-12 at 15:39 -0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 09:48:20AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Alexei,
> > 
> > On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 12:53:11 -0800 Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 07:32:45AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > > 
> > > > Commits
> > > > 
> > > >   3bdc28aa2340 ("selftests/bpf: add btf annotations for cgroup_local_storage maps")
> > > >   1dfd1959fed4 ("bpf: add bpffs pretty print for cgroup local storage maps")
> > > >   3adc62d9a5be ("bpf: pass struct btf pointer to the map_check_btf() callback")
> > > >   9cf3a785dc4c ("selftests/bpf: use __bpf_constant_htons in test_prog.c")
> > > > 
> > > > are missing a Signed-off-by from their committers.  
> > > 
> > > the must be a script mistake?
> > > 
> > > I clearly see SOBs for all of them.
> > 
> > For example:
> > 
> > commit 3bdc28aa2340bf1e5af753287b373522bd1c02a9 (bpf-next/master)
> > Author: Roman Gushchin <guroan@gmail.com>
> > Date:   Mon Dec 10 15:43:02 2018 -0800
> > 
> >     selftests/bpf: add btf annotations for cgroup_local_storage maps
> >     
> >     Add btf annotations to cgroup local storage maps (per-cpu and shared)
> >     in the network packet counting example.
> >     
> >     Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
> >     Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
> >     Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
> >     Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
> >     Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
> > 
> > But it was committed by you, not Daniel.
> 
> since there were only 4 commits I fixed them up manually.
> But this approach doesn't scale.
> We do rebase our trees when we need to fixup or drop patches and
> at any given point a number of commits will be committed by me
> and another set by Daniel. When we rebase we cannot keep adding
> our SOBs to the other person SOBs.
> Then comes the next rebase and we get to the point of
> double and triple SOBs ?
> 
> I think you need to adjust the script to something like:
> SOBs by Daniel | Alexei == commit by Daniel | Alexei
> in bpf and bpf-next trees.

Are you aware of Linus' opinion about rebasing? If not, please have a look
at https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/3/26/71 or https://lwn.net/Articles/328436/.

Thanks,

Bart.

Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commits in the bpf-next tree

[Alexei Starovoitov]

On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 3:45 PM Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> wrote:
>
> Are you aware of Linus' opinion about rebasing? If not, please have a look
> at https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/3/26/71 or https://lwn.net/Articles/328436/.

very much aware.
above is not applicable to this use case.

Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commits in the bpf-next tree

[David Miller]

From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 15:39:10 -0800

> But this approach doesn't scale.
> We do rebase our trees when we need to fixup or drop patches and
> at any given point a number of commits will be committed by me
> and another set by Daniel. When we rebase we cannot keep adding
> our SOBs to the other person SOBs.
> Then comes the next rebase and we get to the point of
> double and triple SOBs ?

If you use "--signoff" in whatever commands do the rebase you will
get exactly one signoff for yourself and Daniel at maximum.  If it
is there already, git will not add a duplicate one on top.

Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commits in the bpf-next tree

[Alexei Starovoitov]

On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 04:45:26PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 15:39:10 -0800
> 
> > But this approach doesn't scale.
> > We do rebase our trees when we need to fixup or drop patches and
> > at any given point a number of commits will be committed by me
> > and another set by Daniel. When we rebase we cannot keep adding
> > our SOBs to the other person SOBs.
> > Then comes the next rebase and we get to the point of
> > double and triple SOBs ?
> 
> If you use "--signoff" in whatever commands do the rebase you will
> get exactly one signoff for yourself and Daniel at maximum.  If it
> is there already, git will not add a duplicate one on top.

If Stephen's scripts can recognize SOB anywhere in the log then
--signoff can theoretically solve it.
Unfortunately it's "Incompatible with the --interactive option"
So we have to do things manually
or fix scripts
or fix git.

Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commits in the bpf-next tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 760 bytes --]

Hi Alexei,

On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 20:33:41 -0800 Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If Stephen's scripts can recognize SOB anywhere in the log then
> --signoff can theoretically solve it.

My script just grabs all the Signed-off-by lines in the commit message.

> Unfortunately it's "Incompatible with the --interactive option"
> So we have to do things manually
> or fix scripts
> or fix git.

My version (2.19.1 and 2.20.0) of git does not say it is incompatible
with --interactive, so maybe the last is true :-)  It says:

           Note that
           if --interactive is given then only commits marked to be picked,
           edited or reworded will have the trailer added.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commits in the bpf-next tree

[Alexei Starovoitov]

On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 04:37:28PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Alexei,
> 
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 20:33:41 -0800 Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > If Stephen's scripts can recognize SOB anywhere in the log then
> > --signoff can theoretically solve it.
> 
> My script just grabs all the Signed-off-by lines in the commit message.
> 
> > Unfortunately it's "Incompatible with the --interactive option"
> > So we have to do things manually
> > or fix scripts
> > or fix git.
> 
> My version (2.19.1 and 2.20.0) of git does not say it is incompatible
> with --interactive, so maybe the last is true :-)  It says:

Awesome! While 2.17.1 failed, 2.20.0 worked!