Re: [PATCH 1/6] dax/hmem, e820, resource: Defer Soft Reserved registration until hmem is ready

[<dan.j.williams@intel.com>]

Koralahalli Channabasappa, Smita wrote:
> On 9/8/2025 4:01 PM, dan.j.williams@intel.com wrote:
> > [ add Boris and Ard ]
> > 
> > Ard, Boris, can you have a look at the touches to early e820/x86 init
> > (insert_resource_late()) and give an ack (or nak). The general problem
> > here is conflicts between e820 memory resources and CXL subsystem memory
> > resources.
> > 
> > Smita Koralahalli wrote:
> >> Insert Soft Reserved memory into a dedicated soft_reserve_resource tree
> >> instead of the iomem_resource tree at boot.
> >>
> >> Publishing Soft Reserved ranges into iomem too early causes conflicts with
> >> CXL hotplug and region assembly failure, especially when Soft Reserved
> >> overlaps CXL regions.
> >>
> >> Re-inserting these ranges into iomem will be handled in follow-up patches,
> >> after ensuring CXL window publication ordering is stabilized and when the
> >> dax_hmem is ready to consume them.
> >>
> >> This avoids trimming or deleting resources later and provides a cleaner
> >> handoff between EFI-defined memory and CXL resource management.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Smita Koralahalli <Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com>
> > 
> > 
> >> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> > 
> > Smita, if you added changes this should have Co-developed-by. Otherwise
> > plain Signed-off-by is interpreted as only chain of custody.  Any other
> > patches that you add my Signed-off-by to should also have
> > Co-developed-by or be From: me.
> > 
> > Alternatively if you completely rewritel a patch with your own approach
> > then note the source (with a Link:) and leave off the original SOB.
> > 
> > Lastly, in this case it looks unmodified from what I wrote? Then it
> > should be:
> > 
> > From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Smita Koralahalli <Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com>
> > 
> > ...to show the chain of custody of you forwarding a diff authored
> > completely by someone else.
> 
> Thanks for clarifying, Dan. I wasn’t aware of the distinction before 
> (especially to handle the chain of custody..). I will update to reflect 
> that properly and will also be careful with how I handle authorship and 
> sign-offs in future submissions.

Yeah, the choice to replace From: is subjective and I usually reserve
that for significant rewrites. If any of the original patch remains then
add Co-developed-by + Signed-off-by. If none of the original patch
remains I do still like to say:

"based on an original patch by ..." with a Link: to that inspiration
patch.

...and if you just forward the original, keep From: untouched and just
add your own Signed-off-by as documented in
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst.