From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: w.sang@pengutronix.de (Wolfram Sang) Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 15:45:30 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] arm/mxc: add the missing UART_PADDR for i.mx53 In-Reply-To: <20110720134426.GD6999@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net> References: <1310251913-9877-1-git-send-email-troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com> <1311167599-21790-1-git-send-email-shawn.guo@linaro.org> <20110720130830.GD2377@pengutronix.de> <20110720132418.GB6999@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net> <20110720132720.GE2377@pengutronix.de> <20110720134426.GD6999@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net> Message-ID: <20110720134530.GA15471@pengutronix.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 09:44:27PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: > On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 03:27:20PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > Then you should at least add his Signed-off. And maybe also mark him as > > > > the author of the patch? > > > > > > > I did exactly what you suggested here on a mx53 fec patch, but I was > > > told by Troy to change his s-o-b to reported-by. So let's see what > > > he would say about this one. > > > > Okay, not much of a deal for such a patch. Though, I have doubts if one > > can request removing the SoB for a patch other people put work on top > > of. > > > So you are telling you are not following the list closely? If "following closely" == "reading every single mail", then surely not. Why? -- Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: