From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754677Ab3KVAyP (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Nov 2013 19:54:15 -0500 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.11.231]:54076 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753041Ab3KVAyO (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Nov 2013 19:54:14 -0500 Message-ID: <528EAB34.6010105@codeaurora.org> Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 16:54:12 -0800 From: Stephen Boyd User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vinayak Kale CC: linux-kernel , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , tglx , Will Deacon , "jcm@redhat.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/2] genirq: Add an accessor for IRQ_PER_CPU flag References: <1384946021-22100-1-git-send-email-vkale@apm.com> <1384946021-22100-2-git-send-email-vkale@apm.com> <528CFC77.5050200@codeaurora.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/20/13 22:10, Vinayak Kale wrote: > [removing chris.smith@st.com] > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Vinayak Kale wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 11:46 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote: >>> On 11/20/13 03:13, Vinayak Kale wrote: >>>> This patch adds an accessor function for IRQ_PER_CPU flag. >>>> The accessor function is useful to dertermine whether an IRQ is percpu or not. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Vinayak Kale >>>> --- >>> This looks like a copy of Chris Smith's patch. Shouldn't Chris be the >>> author and the commit text be whatever Chris sent? >> In the cover letter of this patch series I did mention about Chris's >> earlier patch. I didn't know his email-id earlier, have found the >> mail-id now. CCing the mail-id to check whether it's still valid. >> > Chris's mail-id doesn't seem to be valid, the earlier mail to his > mail-id [chris.smith@st.com] bounced. > Please let me know in such case how to mention original author's credits. It's up to the maintainer accepting the patch. If I was picking up the patch I would say it doesn't really matter if the mail-id is valid anymore. Leave the original patch intact and just add your sign-off. If you took the patch and significantly changed it it's good to put "Based-on-a-patch-by:" and then take over authorship. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation