From: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@linaro.org>
To: Taniya Das <tdas@codeaurora.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@codeaurora.org>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org,
skannan@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
amit.kucheria@linaro.org, evgreen@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] cpufreq: qcom-hw: Add support for QCOM cpufreq HW driver
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:43:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181011124333.GA10790@centauri.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <40719973-21a0-120d-7193-8e6287cbbd18@codeaurora.org>
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 04:45:25PM +0530, Taniya Das wrote:
> > WARNING: Duplicate signature
> > #370:
> > Signed-off-by: Taniya Das <tdas@codeaurora.org>
> >
> > If you are more than one author, you can use the Co-Developed-by tag.
> >
>
> Hmm, I do see multiple SOBs being used and merged.
>
>From Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:
"""
A Co-Developed-by: states that the patch was also created by another developer
along with the original author. This is useful at times when multiple people
work on a single patch. Note, this person also needs to have a Signed-off-by:
line in the patch as well.
"""
So it is not wrong to have two Signed-off-bys, just that
having the Co-Developed-by tag clearly shows that there
was more than one author.
Without the Co-Developed-by tag, the second Signed-off-by tag
is ambiguous, since the seconds Signed-off-by tag might just
have meant that that person was in the delivery chain of the
patch.
I think that the Co-Developed-by tag is optional, so if the
co-developer doesn't care about taking credit, it can probably
be skipped.
Kind regards,
Niklas
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@linaro.org>
To: Taniya Das <tdas@codeaurora.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@codeaurora.org>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org,
skannan@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
amit.kucheria@linaro.org, evgreen@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] cpufreq: qcom-hw: Add support for QCOM cpufreq HW driver
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 14:43:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181011124333.GA10790@centauri.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <40719973-21a0-120d-7193-8e6287cbbd18@codeaurora.org>
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 04:45:25PM +0530, Taniya Das wrote:
> > WARNING: Duplicate signature
> > #370:
> > Signed-off-by: Taniya Das <tdas@codeaurora.org>
> >
> > If you are more than one author, you can use the Co-Developed-by tag.
> >
>
> Hmm, I do see multiple SOBs being used and merged.
>
From Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:
"""
A Co-Developed-by: states that the patch was also created by another developer
along with the original author. This is useful at times when multiple people
work on a single patch. Note, this person also needs to have a Signed-off-by:
line in the patch as well.
"""
So it is not wrong to have two Signed-off-bys, just that
having the Co-Developed-by tag clearly shows that there
was more than one author.
Without the Co-Developed-by tag, the second Signed-off-by tag
is ambiguous, since the seconds Signed-off-by tag might just
have meant that that person was in the delivery chain of the
patch.
I think that the Co-Developed-by tag is optional, so if the
co-developer doesn't care about taking credit, it can probably
be skipped.
Kind regards,
Niklas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-11 12:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-23 10:33 [PATCH v8 0/2] cpufreq: qcom-hw: Add support for QCOM cpufreq HW driver Taniya Das
2018-09-23 10:33 ` [PATCH v8 1/2] dt-bindings: cpufreq: Introduce QCOM CPUFREQ Firmware bindings Taniya Das
2018-09-27 15:31 ` Rob Herring
2018-10-11 10:31 ` Taniya Das
2018-10-21 20:06 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-09-23 10:33 ` [PATCH v8 2/2] cpufreq: qcom-hw: Add support for QCOM cpufreq HW driver Taniya Das
2018-10-04 21:04 ` Niklas Cassel
2018-10-11 11:15 ` Taniya Das
2018-10-11 12:43 ` Niklas Cassel [this message]
2018-10-11 12:43 ` Niklas Cassel
2018-10-05 10:55 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-10-11 11:19 ` Taniya Das
2018-10-08 8:40 ` Niklas Cassel
2018-10-08 9:59 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-10-08 10:38 ` Niklas Cassel
2018-10-08 10:40 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-10-08 10:59 ` Taniya Das
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20181011124333.GA10790@centauri.lan \
--to=niklas.cassel@linaro.org \
--cc=amit.kucheria@linaro.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=evgreen@google.com \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=rnayak@codeaurora.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=skannan@codeaurora.org \
--cc=tdas@codeaurora.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.