Hello Dan, > 5 вер. 2019 р. о 4:32 пп Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> написав(ла): > > On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 03:23:21PM +0300, Oleh Kravchenko wrote: >> Let me summarize the chronology of the last activities below: >> 1. I have sent the patch for the bugs that I have found by static analyzer at PVS-Studio >> Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 00:18:19 +0300 >> https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-leds/msg13181.html >> >> 2. At 5 Sep 2019 12:57:19 +0300 Time Dan Cartpen has sent the patch with the same proposal >> 3. Uwe Kleine-König started to discuss his results of review by asking Dan on how he was found it. >> >> Would you mine if you will keep me as a Original author of this patch based on fact 1? > > Heh. > > No, I didn't steal your patch. :P I am the author of the Smatch static > analysis tool and mostly fix things found by Smatch. I don't use other > static analysis tools except to do a final QC of my patches. > Thanks! I didn’t know this tool. Will take a look on it. By the way, you can use PVS-Studio freely https://www.viva64.com/en/b/0600/ They provide free license for open source projects. > It's super common for people to send duplicate fixes when it's based on > static analysis. Most of the static analysis people hang out on > kernel-janitors so we don't send duplicate patches. For a while people > were getting annoyed by all the duplicates but now they accept it as > their punishment for introducing a bug in the first place. > No problem. We all doing good things! > Anyway, the rule for kernel development is that normally the first > person's patch goes in, so we will take your patch. > I think next time you will take a look at mail list before sending patches ;-) > regards, > dan carpenter > P.S.: resent because was in non plain-text format. -- Best regards, Oleh Kravchenko
