Re: When we detect that a 16550 was in fact part of a NatSemi SuperIO chip

[David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>]

On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 09:59 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> So for now, it looks like we either have to make sure that rmk is 
> comfortable with not editing sign-off's (working on it, but I can't 
> guarantee anything), or that you're ok with getting the email stripped, 
> _or_ you will end up having to send patches directly to me rather than to 
> rmk (and face the chaos and bumbling that is Linus).

I think I can handle the chaos and bumbling that is Linus. In fact I
sent this one to Andrew to give it a bit of exposure in the -mm tree
first, but since it's a serial patch I also copied it to Russell as a
courtesy. 

Russell has now said that he committed it by accident, and from that I
infer that he's not going to make a habit of it. So that ought to
suffice for now.

The government department responsible for administering the DPA has a
'Data Protection Help-Line' which I have asked to clarify the situation;
it shouldn't be necessary to pay lawyers to do it. But then again, I can
well imagine that they'll simply refer me to the Act itself rather than
giving a coherent answer, so maybe a paid opinion would be useful.

-- 
dwmw2