Reported-by is the normal response for this kind of patch, 1000's of examples in the kernel mailing lists.
This whole thing tastes to me like a pay-off for an unwanted gift, you don't go into this sort of an exchange on a security mailing list expecting kernel contributor credit for fixing a bug. That's just not how it works. Maybe it should work like that but it simply doesn't. OP had pre-set expectations and those were found to be in the wrong, nobody got 'robbed' and misrepresenting the exchange to one that makes the kernel maintainer seem like an asshole when that wasn't at all how it went down makes me feel even less good about the whole thing.
Reported-by ranges the gamut of 'I ran into this bug' to 'I found this issue and here is my patch, which I hope is useful to you'.
If you want to negotiate credit rules for 4 line patches up front you are of course welcome to do so but keep in mind that maintainers can and do accept patches, rewrite them and contribute them under their own name (and their responsibility), especially security patches.
This whole thing tastes to me like a pay-off for an unwanted gift, you don't go into this sort of an exchange on a security mailing list expecting kernel contributor credit for fixing a bug. That's just not how it works. Maybe it should work like that but it simply doesn't. OP had pre-set expectations and those were found to be in the wrong, nobody got 'robbed' and misrepresenting the exchange to one that makes the kernel maintainer seem like an asshole when that wasn't at all how it went down makes me feel even less good about the whole thing.
Reported-by ranges the gamut of 'I ran into this bug' to 'I found this issue and here is my patch, which I hope is useful to you'.
If you want to negotiate credit rules for 4 line patches up front you are of course welcome to do so but keep in mind that maintainers can and do accept patches, rewrite them and contribute them under their own name (and their responsibility), especially security patches.