Re: [PATCH] aarch64: add HXT Phecda core memory operation ifuncs

[Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>]

On 06/12/2018 10:45 AM, Hongbo Zhang wrote:
> On 12 June 2018 at 14:27, Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh@gotplt.org> wrote:
>> On 06/12/2018 11:25 AM, Hongbo Zhang wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you for the quick review.
>>> It is my first time to upstream a glibc patch, rules seem a bit
>>> different from kernel/uboot etc.
>>> If it is up to me to clarify the copyright, how to do it, add a
>>> Co-authored-by tag?
>>
>>
>> Yes, the rules are very different from kernel/uboot where the contributors
>> continue to own copyright and there's typically only a developer sign-off to
>> claim that copyright.  In glibc and gcc we have a concept of copyright
>> assignment where we transfer ownership of code to the Free Software
>> Foundation who we trust to defend our copyright in case of infringement.
>>
>> The problem with the patch is not that of format; you have formatted the
>> patch perfectly and would have been good to be committed, but we need a
>> copyright assignment (i.e. an agreement that you're willing to transfer
>> ownership of the copyright to this code to the FSF) from all authors of the
>> patch.
>>
>> Your contribution has an automatic assignment since you're a Linaro
>> assignee, but that's not the case for the other author (AFAICT, again I
>> don't have access to the copyrights file so I can't tell for sure, only the
>> FSF stewards can) because of which we need to understand the scope of their
>> contribution and their assignment status to decide on the future course of
>> action on this patch.
>>
>> Sorry for the trouble, but this is an unavoidable part of the patch review
>> workflow.
>>
> It is not a trouble, I learned the copyright assignment now, thank you.
> But as to the exact steps, Shoud Minfeng answer questionnaire like this page?
> https://www.fsf.org/licensing/assigning.html
> He never did that before.

The forms are linked from here:

<https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Contribution%20checklist#FSF_copyright_Assignment>

For a company, usually someone who has authorization to negotiate and 
sign contracts has to do this, not individual patch authors.

In this case, I think we can still accept the patch because the number 
of lines changes is small (10 lines), but we'd need it for the next patch.

Thanks,
Florian