On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
>
> Bart Van Assche wrote:
>>
>> I would like to contact the author of the fourth patch. But unfortunately I
>> could not find any author information in that patch.
>
> yes, non signed and unreviewed patches is a common practice of ofed, does
>
>I would like to contact the author of the fourth patch. But
>unfortunately I could not find any author information in that patch.
Here is the info:
git log kernel_patches/fixes/srp_4_dev_loss_tmo.patch
commit c97ac3a3c509b6fd1fd511e44e81699c21704629
Author: Vu Pham
Date: Tue Dec 9 10:34:3
Bart Van Assche wrote:
I would like to contact the author of the fourth patch. But unfortunately I
could not find any author information in that patch.
yes, non signed and unreviewed patches is a common practice of ofed,
does this create legal issues? maybe that would be the way to stop this?
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > I noticed that there are seven SRP patches (bug fixes) present in OFED
> > 1.4.1 that are not present in mainstream Linux kernels up to and
> > including version 2.6.30. Do you know whether it is documented
> > anywhere which process is
> I noticed that there are seven SRP patches (bug fixes) present in OFED
> 1.4.1 that are not present in mainstream Linux kernels up to and
> including version 2.6.30. Do you know whether it is documented
> anywhere which process is followed for merging such patches in the
> mainstream Linux
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 2:44 PM, Bart Van Assche
wrote:
> I noticed that there are six SRP patches (bug fixes) present in OFED
> 1.4.1 that are not present in mainstream Linux kernels up to and
> including version 2.6.30. Do you know whether it is documented
> anywhere which process is followed fo
