|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

The "rare write" mechanism

The "rare write" mechanism

Posted Jun 2, 2017 1:08 UTC (Fri) by PaXTeam (guest, #24616)
In reply to: The "rare write" mechanism by corbet
Parent article: The "rare write" mechanism

Dear Jon,

you can't say you weren't warned. some specific examples of apparently wilfully misattributed authorship claims:

> Cook's implementation contains architecture-specific code that relies on CPU features on x86 and ARM that selectively
> enable and disable write access to areas of memory.

the x86 specific code is mine, not his.

> Cook noted that his code is inlined [...]

again, it's my code which he copied.

> Cook's newly introduced __wr_rare annotation[...]

it's my __read_only attribute.

> Cook gave a simple example of the usage of the single rare_write() call by converting a function in net/core/sock_diag.c from:

it's my code too.

> Cook's implementation of the rare write functions on x86 became the following:

it's all my code.


to post comments

The "rare write" mechanism

Posted Jun 2, 2017 7:02 UTC (Fri) by itvirta (guest, #49997) [Link] (1 responses)

> the code is mine, not his.

I think there might be more appropriate forums for copyright infringement claims than comments on a news site.

The "rare write" mechanism

Posted Jun 2, 2017 13:02 UTC (Fri) by madscientist (subscriber, #16861) [Link]

No one is talking about copyright infringement (which is good, since that's not a valid claim). What's being discussed is attribution, and in particular attribution in the article (not attribution in the patches). I think the comments section of the article is a valid place to discuss that. I have no opinion on the merits.


Copyright © 2025, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds