I was wondering how on earth it could happen that I came into the TOP20 at "Sign-offs in the 2.6.24 kernel". The problem is that the following statement sn't completely true: "Looking at the Signed-off-by headers of patches is always interesting; if one removes the signoffs added by the authors themselves, what is left is a list of the gatekeepers - those who channel the code into the mainline." But this also happens when Andrew merges patches. E.g. in current -mm the header of maps4-add-proc-kpagecount-interface.patch reads: <-- snip --> From: Matt Mackall <firstname.lastname@example.org> This makes physical page map counts available to userspace. Together with /proc/pid/pagemap and /proc/pid/clear_refs, this can be used to monitor memory usage on a per-page basis. [email@example.com: make struct proc_kpagemap static] Signed-off-by: Matt Mackall <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <email@example.com> Cc: David Rientjes <firstname.lastname@example.org> Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <email@example.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <firstname.lastname@example.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <email@example.com> <-- snip --> If this patch will get into Linus' tree your statistics will wrongly list me as a gatekeeper for this patch.
Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds