From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751909AbdBFWNt (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Feb 2017 17:13:49 -0500 Received: from mail-wr0-f193.google.com ([209.85.128.193]:35995 "EHLO mail-wr0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751164AbdBFWNr (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Feb 2017 17:13:47 -0500 Message-ID: <5898F518.3000402@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 22:13:44 +0000 From: Sudip Mukherjee User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Kiszka , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jiri Slaby , Andy Shevchenko CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 1/2] serial: exar: split out the exar code from 8250_pci References: <1485815302-5708-1-git-send-email-sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com> <5894F6A2.5000609@gmail.com> <1a0e4034-007e-d5cf-27ff-eb382ead776e@siemens.com> In-Reply-To: <1a0e4034-007e-d5cf-27ff-eb382ead776e@siemens.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday 06 February 2017 01:49 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2017-02-03 22:31, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: >> On Friday 03 February 2017 02:02 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> BTW, are you personally the copyright holder or your employer Codethink? >>> Depends on your contractual situation, but the former is less common. >> >> Well, Codethink has nothing to do with this patch. This was a voluntary >> work started before I joined Codethink, but then I joined Codethink and >> found very little time to finish this. So finally now its done. >> >> https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/2015-November/015372.html >> > > Hmm, why using your corporate email address then? This suggests a > different copyright situation. > > Funnily, I just received this question internally: How can you tell > apart if someone sends a personal contribution via his/her employer > account from someone contributing on behalf of a company, thus with that > company holding the rights? I argued that no one would do the former to > prevent wrong accounting, but you just proved a counterexample. :) well, I have been doing it this way from the very first day I started contributing. Regards Sudip