From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BA9BC76195 for ; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 09:09:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54765217D9 for ; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 09:09:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1563268162; bh=4r33a+xYn3ykb/9WpoGUpLWaTO2guXYpyiU6YoPdW3k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=ZTimRnXCxEG09lDP/6Ycv2vdjFryorhXAoRbYFbAkiF5RqioA3Helcw2c0TM8/tgM r6mukXwfOh8U/hVN+lJQ5SpKQH2cqK2iBw2u9M7wrjyCcw5iivQUyvyNMt90ww239b 81uNzmVNCLBfj6J3/qB5cUIy5VUCtWnk+lFnsk7Q= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728015AbfGPJJV (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jul 2019 05:09:21 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:42840 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727105AbfGPJJV (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jul 2019 05:09:21 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [113.157.217.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CEEF420659; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 09:09:19 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1563268160; bh=4r33a+xYn3ykb/9WpoGUpLWaTO2guXYpyiU6YoPdW3k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Jmdj/QvypWhbnaUAwaauhhH92Mjm0uH79cqHp+cZtRtDGlrr4Jy/yf6CR36m9e38F 88776BYX1Do8bHeS+YZcAiI3spoEUhwE5T0NjvfN4LY1iYUhGOMNVGyfplTm8ux6Cn xSNHFXhNlwb2JaRfdgSFxL9GEOaq12kCqS7VPT60= Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 18:09:17 +0900 From: Greg KH To: Leon Romanovsky Cc: Selvin Xavier , linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, dledford@redhat.com, jgg@ziepe.ca, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Parav Pandit Subject: Re: [PATCH for-rc] RDMA/bnxt_re: Honor vlan_id in GID entry comparison Message-ID: <20190716090917.GA11964@kroah.com> References: <20190715091913.15726-1-selvin.xavier@broadcom.com> <20190716071030.GH10130@mtr-leonro.mtl.com> <20190716071644.GA21780@kroah.com> <20190716084126.GJ10130@mtr-leonro.mtl.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190716084126.GJ10130@mtr-leonro.mtl.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) Sender: linux-rdma-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 11:41:26AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 04:16:44PM +0900, Greg KH wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 10:10:30AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 05:19:13AM -0400, Selvin Xavier wrote: > > > > GID entry consist of GID, vlan, netdev and smac. > > > > Extend GID duplicate check companions to consider vlan_id as well > > > > to support IPv6 VLAN based link local addresses. Introduce > > > > a new structure (bnxt_qplib_gid_info) to hold gid and vlan_id information. > > > > > > > > The issue is discussed in the following thread > > > > https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rdma/msg81594.html > > > > > > > > Fixes: 823b23da7113 ("IB/core: Allow vlan link local address based RoCE GIDs") > > > > Cc: # v5.2+ > > > > Reported-by: Yi Zhang > > > > > > > Co-developed-by: Parav Pandit > > > > Signed-off-by: Parav Pandit > > > > > > I never understood why bad habits are so stinky. > > > > > > Can you please explain us what does it mean Co-developed-by and > > > Signed-off-by of the same person in the same patch? > > > > See Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst for what that tag > > means. > > Read it, it doesn't help me to understand if I should now add > Co-developed-by tag to most of RDMA Mellanox upstreamed patches, > which already care my Signed-off-by, because I'm changing and fixing > them many times. It depends, it's your call, if you think you deserve the credit, sure, add it. If you are just doing basic "review" where you tell people what needs to be done better, that's probably not what you need to do here. One example, where I just added myself to a patch happened last week where the developer submitted one solution, I took it and rewrote the whole implementation (from raw kobjects to using the driver model). The original author got the "From:" and I got a Co-developed-by line. Does that help? thanks, greg k-h