Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Reported by would be appropriate credit if (a) the maintainer did not read Ariel's code or (b) Ariel's code was utter crap, so it was effectively discarded.

"I like my code better" indicates that neither of this happened. So, Ariel deserves (at least partial) credit for fixing, since this was not a "clean room" fix.



"I like my code better" is not what the maintainer said[1]:

> Hi Ariel,

>

> I've added Christophe to Cc who works on ppc32.

>

> I haven't actually reproduced the crash with gdbserver, but I have a

> test case which shows the bug, so I've been able to confirm it and

> test a fix.

>

> Thanks for your patch, but I wanted to fix it differently. Can you try

> the patch below and make sure it fixes the bug for you?

>

> I've also attached the test case I've been using.

>

> Christophe are you able to test these on some 32-bit machines? I've

> tested it in qemu and on one 32-bit machine I have here, but some more

> real testing would be good.

>

>

> If the patch works then I'll need to do manual back ports for several of

> the stable kernels, and then once those are ready I will publish the

> patch.

>

> cheers

>

> [...]

[1] https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2022-June/24...


Except nobody said “I like my code better”. Or even pointed to another issue for OP to fix. See https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2022-June/24...


And if Ellerman did not want to spend time going back and forth, he could have accepted Ariel's patch then immediately modify in a new commit.


For that it would have to be properly signed off. This was explicitly noted in the exchange and not remedied by OP.


Why introduce risk in a bisect? A Co-developed-by or another appropriate attribution tag should solve this nicely?

Lots of options it seems: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37685190




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: