From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-189.mta1.migadu.com (out-189.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.189]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EC272F90E0 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2026 17:16:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.189 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785258979; cv=none; b=lasN5fPMR+GR8qdhOwiSYr+/MOneLnJBhCSfwnGd3EzqhsMd3MScsAFfx+Y6hf5NMv7DPMUn+t9I8lQwI0Gk+PNCbNjqixd5QZjpoFr9dUlNurbZKu8f9YVhsTGju0TetM73/Fs4tV82w0VzjNnbLpfip0YnytzwmAMjxnFrTdY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785258979; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OUbNJR0+UJfL9gasc1f9tZ7T+VPKTwBCMcunPXi/+ko=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Wc2WyPMw3CTNMMW+B+1Urjv1hOpj4awhmYOWGeQjYDXuiRyBnNSV2D9ieb1w4XIpJ8Hgs5gWd3qwQECTbde6Wo0iw5UjttjD4MUGrWnGxtCebtXRmElRNJpi/eIajefGZQGmd0+XuXzjMlln3f7ApOdmF7lBOkbT8/IE8a5AkUI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=wyuan.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wyuan.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=wyuan.org header.i=@wyuan.org header.b=NJ1BJh0J; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.189 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=wyuan.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wyuan.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=wyuan.org header.i=@wyuan.org header.b="NJ1BJh0J" Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 01:15:45 +0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wyuan.org; s=key1; t=1785258962; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=FyKBy9FQwVsc+qRA2GC+u9lRYdlYs8hPWPOQeWCaGfM=; b=NJ1BJh0JwFC8gPlQpNS47irr7vF7wPsXFrVZYH4UDzGH5Sd2HycIScqSjVjyc1cDx0wI13 NxIcsL7a3FphqmYID5m85DGCfun8qWDUq3Z3LvuIEnft3+sFdal0JndFKMUqvxSQB46KNp +d8C0v/sckflPs1bUYPCAjCXs9u0DnJ6BlRZBTWky3FeCoqX8DVDlvbkEkSWDblJL0/pzN HefcwqyE1OidFsYqilCTJbNIykR305uBkdRL5i9BkiwQGJH6xqwN+VM9+zBYjSC1yqQ6Cw L0wrg7E8ozTLz/06IMmtJ0c+wXBVtVheYgrRNVS1c8vk/MJQnXMZ+MZlHBTuhw== X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Weijie Yuan To: Randy Dunlap Cc: =?utf-8?B?5bKz56eJ5Z2k?= , mchehab@kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com, corbet@lwn.net, shiju.jose@huawei.com, jacopo.mondi@ideasonboard.com, laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com, hverkuil+cisco@kernel.org, sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] Documentation: fix "should be use" grammar in ABI README Message-ID: References: <20260728041213.52820-1-yuebingkun@kylinos.cn> <20260728041213.52820-2-yuebingkun@kylinos.cn> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 09:55:42AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > That is to say, when dealing with multiple authors, we suggest using > > trailers to represent the sequence of authors in chronological order. > > > > Then, this will facilitate subsequent readers to understand the > > development history of the patch through the order of the trailers.(?) > > > > And, aren't these subsequent examples merely confining the discussion to > > these two trailers? > > They seem to be but that's just a documentation deficiency IMO. OK, let me take some time to look through the history of this file and see if I can uncover any clues. If this is indeed a flaw, it might be worth clarifying. That said, I am not sure how many people actually find it ambiguous. In any case, it may be better for someone with more experience to improve it, as I am clearly not qualified to do so. > > Besides the submitting-patches file, It seems to me that the probability > > of "Signed-off-by" appearing on the last line is much higher than in > > other cases. Is this a usual practice? It seems that everyone tacitly > > agreed to write "Acked-by" and "Reviewed-by" at the top, even though > > they occurred after "Sob". > > > > I chose 2 files and looked at their "git log" history: MAINTAINERS and > kernel/panic.c. In those files I see corroboration of my "claim," so I'm > satisfied with it. Makes sense. Perhaps different subsystems simply have different preferences, then. My observation may not have been representative. Thanks.