From: "Konstantin Ryabitsev" <konstantin.ryabitsev@linux.dev>
To: "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>,
"Doug Anderson" <dianders@chromium.org>
Cc: richard.leitner@linux.dev,
"Thierry Reding" <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
"Sam Ravnborg" <sam@ravnborg.org>,
"David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
"Daniel Vetter" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
"Rob Herring" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
"Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
"Richard Leitner" <richard.leitner@skidata.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v2 1/2] dt-bindings: display: simple: add support for InnoLux G070ACE-L01
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2023 18:32:15 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4d4471f957af144d7a0f22a2147d90f9@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2d7d8462-4e75-bbd2-4ae5-6403eda43020@linaro.org>
April 21, 2023 1:01 PM, "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>> Ah, got it. So I guess from the perspective of "b4" every time the
>> author modifies a patch (like adding new tags to it) then it's a new
>> application of Signed-off-by and thus the old Signed-off-by is removed
>> from the top and a new one is added below all the tags that have been
>> received. Thus if b4 grabs all the tags off the mailing list for
>> applying it ends up in a different order than if it grabs all the tags
>> off the mailing list for sending a new version.
>>
>> OK, I can understand that perspective. I'll keep it in mind.
>
> Yeah. I actually agree with your point that submitter's SoB should
> always be the last one, but I agree more with using process via
> standardized tools. IOW, since I cannot change in this matter b4, I need
> to agree with it. :)
FWIW, everyone disagrees on how it should be done (which is a totally normal state of things). B4 uses the "chain of custody" logic when it comes to trailers, described here:
https://lore.kernel.org/tools/20221031165842.vxr4kp6h7qnkc53l@meerkat.local/
In brief, the logic here is that the "Signed-off-by" trailer indicates where the chain of custody for all previous trailers ends. The following order:
Reviewed-by: Reviewer <>
Signed-off-by: Submitter <>
Signed-off-by: Submaintainer <>
Tells that it was the Submitter who collected and applied the Reviewed-by tag, which is why when someone runs "b4 trailers -u", their Signed-off-by is always moved to the bottom to indicate the proper chain of custody boundary.
The following order says something very different:
Signed-off-by: Submitter <>
Reviewed-by: Reviewer <>
Signed-off-by: Submaintainer <>
This indicates that the "Reviewed-by" trailer was collected by the Submaintainer, because it is below the chain-of-custody boundary of the Submitter.
The main reason is if Reviewer says "hey, I don't remember reviewing this, who put my name in there," the order will point at the person in whose custody section this tag shows up.
Hope this helps.
Best regards,
-K
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Konstantin Ryabitsev" <konstantin.ryabitsev@linux.dev>
To: "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>,
"Doug Anderson" <dianders@chromium.org>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, richard.leitner@linux.dev,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
Richard Leitner <richard.leitner@skidata.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v2 1/2] dt-bindings: display: simple: add support for InnoLux G070ACE-L01
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2023 18:32:15 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4d4471f957af144d7a0f22a2147d90f9@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2d7d8462-4e75-bbd2-4ae5-6403eda43020@linaro.org>
April 21, 2023 1:01 PM, "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>> Ah, got it. So I guess from the perspective of "b4" every time the
>> author modifies a patch (like adding new tags to it) then it's a new
>> application of Signed-off-by and thus the old Signed-off-by is removed
>> from the top and a new one is added below all the tags that have been
>> received. Thus if b4 grabs all the tags off the mailing list for
>> applying it ends up in a different order than if it grabs all the tags
>> off the mailing list for sending a new version.
>>
>> OK, I can understand that perspective. I'll keep it in mind.
>
> Yeah. I actually agree with your point that submitter's SoB should
> always be the last one, but I agree more with using process via
> standardized tools. IOW, since I cannot change in this matter b4, I need
> to agree with it. :)
FWIW, everyone disagrees on how it should be done (which is a totally normal state of things). B4 uses the "chain of custody" logic when it comes to trailers, described here:
https://lore.kernel.org/tools/20221031165842.vxr4kp6h7qnkc53l@meerkat.local/
In brief, the logic here is that the "Signed-off-by" trailer indicates where the chain of custody for all previous trailers ends. The following order:
Reviewed-by: Reviewer <>
Signed-off-by: Submitter <>
Signed-off-by: Submaintainer <>
Tells that it was the Submitter who collected and applied the Reviewed-by tag, which is why when someone runs "b4 trailers -u", their Signed-off-by is always moved to the bottom to indicate the proper chain of custody boundary.
The following order says something very different:
Signed-off-by: Submitter <>
Reviewed-by: Reviewer <>
Signed-off-by: Submaintainer <>
This indicates that the "Reviewed-by" trailer was collected by the Submaintainer, because it is below the chain-of-custody boundary of the Submitter.
The main reason is if Reviewer says "hey, I don't remember reviewing this, who put my name in there," the order will point at the person in whose custody section this tag shows up.
Hope this helps.
Best regards,
-K
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-21 18:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-13 7:50 [PATCH RESEND v2 0/2] panel-simple: Add InnoLux G070ACE-L01 support richard.leitner
2023-03-13 7:50 ` richard.leitner
2023-03-13 7:50 ` [PATCH RESEND v2 1/2] dt-bindings: display: simple: add support for InnoLux G070ACE-L01 richard.leitner
2023-03-13 7:50 ` richard.leitner
2023-04-21 16:15 ` Doug Anderson
2023-04-21 16:15 ` Doug Anderson
2023-04-21 16:26 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-04-21 16:26 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-04-21 16:37 ` Doug Anderson
2023-04-21 16:37 ` Doug Anderson
2023-04-21 16:45 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-04-21 16:45 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-04-21 16:51 ` Doug Anderson
2023-04-21 16:51 ` Doug Anderson
2023-04-21 17:01 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-04-21 17:01 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-04-21 18:32 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev [this message]
2023-04-21 18:32 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2023-03-13 7:50 ` [PATCH RESEND v2 2/2] drm/panel: simple: Add " richard.leitner
2023-03-13 7:50 ` richard.leitner
2023-04-21 16:15 ` Doug Anderson
2023-04-21 16:15 ` Doug Anderson
2023-04-11 9:28 ` [PATCH RESEND v2 0/2] panel-simple: Add InnoLux G070ACE-L01 support Richard Leitner
2023-04-11 9:28 ` Richard Leitner
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=4d4471f957af144d7a0f22a2147d90f9@linux.dev \
--to=konstantin.ryabitsev@linux.dev \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=richard.leitner@linux.dev \
--cc=richard.leitner@skidata.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
/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.