From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from userp2120.oracle.com ([156.151.31.85]:47896 "EHLO userp2120.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726157AbeKZULz (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2018 15:11:55 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : references : mime-version : content-type : in-reply-to; s=corp-2018-07-02; bh=Zk2o+5orK0G2lQede7ooMIWLlaVH0yYu2NvO896YUzM=; b=wZIxVz5Z5nTbi74Tdx4Yq63OKNa3sLAgYiVNRlFHuGmUgLbKTtcCj67bCLk41T2xerPq FDSMXLVQQPmbYP7kiSKTvK0qmHBsjKXAj7W46LAV7QpZF9rPOYC4jcD3vk9c5ay3xkYI ts5WDRstsyCbA5xkyiZowDbk7IgmnaUjg5sR+sPmtv16V+drGgmuNMTdOjkokY2HGhZA EeXDbL9zdV9tmpQlVBaFZjDWxJJZbulCWT4gIrzEDGdUTdlcWl1JUkhs8S11KnertaqO 6IS9sRLXV28ilFNJRtXvZOaerNZoAxHCYqgSHAOaT+5I75zu/ucUZ5DUmHYap25DcwzL pQ== Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 12:18:07 +0300 From: Dan Carpenter Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/18] sparse: correctly handle "-D foo" and "-U foo". The former is from sparse upstream, but they didn't fix the latter for some reason. Message-ID: <20181126091807.GD3088@unbuntlaptop> References: <20181126074909.GI2970@unbuntlaptop> <20181126002734.rmk5kmvtjtol2m2h@ltop.local> <20181126084436.GC10025@movementarian.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181126084436.GC10025@movementarian.org> Sender: smatch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: John Levon Cc: Luc Van Oostenryck , smatch@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 08:44:36AM +0000, John Levon wrote: > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 01:27:35AM +0100, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: > > > Putting this DCO question aside, I would find normal that the commit > > message would contains a small note adding something like: > > [This patch was originally written by ...] > > It's in the subject (where it ended up from git format-patch). Dan has > already taken me to task for the format of the commits here. > > > The signed-off-by should be like: > > Signed-off-by: Original Author > > Signed-off-by: John Levon > > This sounds awfully like *you've* signed off on *this* patch, but sure, > whatever is the usual way. > The logic there is that everyone who touches the patch has to sign off that they didn't add any Secret SCO Unix Source Code to the patch. > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 10:49:09AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > It looks like everything was BCC instead of To: and Cc:? I can't tell > > which went to linux-sparse and which smatch@vger.kernel.org. Smatch is > > GPL and Sparse is MIT, but any shared code is MIT licensed. > > I screwed up the mailing (next ones will be better), but they all went > to smatch. As being in smatch and not sparse is of no use to us, I > thought this made sense right now at least until smatch is nearer > upstream. > > > cherry-pick those two patches. Or John, you could cherry-pick them and > > send them to me. `man git cherry-pick`. > > There's a good few more than just two. If you'd prefer, I can work on > taking them upstream first? Upstreaming first is more ideal, but I'll take them as-is if you want. Smatch licensing allows anyone to upstream shared code from Smatch to Sparse after the fact as well. regards, dan carpenter