From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= Subject: Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the kvm tree Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 14:36:24 +0200 Message-ID: <20170811123623.GA28649@flask> References: <20170811092816.01875df0@canb.auug.org.au> <31a4ba52-fc76-7844-841c-5f15142d473d@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <31a4ba52-fc76-7844-841c-5f15142d473d@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: David Hildenbrand Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Marcelo Tosatti , Gleb Natapov , KVM , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Paolo Bonzini List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org 2017-08-11 08:29+0200, David Hildenbrand: > On 11.08.2017 01:28, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Commit > > > > 53a70daf3cfd ("KVM: nVMX: get rid of nested_release_page*") > > > > is missing a Signed-off-by from its committer. > > > > Thanks, > > Paolo's signed-off is missing. Yes, it is a result of our workflow and there are many more patches like that. In this case, I originally committed the patch on 08-03 and Paolo rebased the branch on 08-07. We rebase when testing discovers bugs and for the first few release candidates (when there are not enough changes to put into next). Should all rebases be done with the --signoff option? Thanks.