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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0ED7C77B78 for ; Thu, 4 May 2023 15:23:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231402AbjEDPXQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 May 2023 11:23:16 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:41908 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230474AbjEDPXO (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 May 2023 11:23:14 -0400 Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A08BB44A1; Thu, 4 May 2023 08:23:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1683213793; x=1714749793; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=9TcAKdsolrTcyR7kRO2MnyaoQAF+RM8oAHRHOpZd1ms=; b=Sf5U85sA1Czn7mrT/KYLakQyLJNbqdykoNf/rwtmlDJuN3vIzsI1FiaC JRkGzlJ4S+Cm6yJuNPXRaralIxiKEvaAPOld5SN8BmdqEjUHdeWpPhrEb aNhRuQ2mPwtawMnbCVc7uomySolt4NdGkOcVVBmH4ivRegIyNhgfh/Zk7 v7Vh0WPnYELR5p3U4aaQUlDway+O3bymHdrlKir0x4N8oZcVJnex0rWXy bQN9U/6yU3FCz0DhrTFSf1CKsulKsvECUdEbqzsHBaMQJwayEDbygF2oT qXvm4c1B2y+1TvIzxKp/vyB8tkc10TxG+aASOMKfzgaRBUnG0wUidcXkg Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10700"; a="346438604" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.99,249,1677571200"; d="scan'208";a="346438604" Received: from orsmga006.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.51]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 May 2023 08:23:13 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10700"; a="674584461" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.99,249,1677571200"; d="scan'208";a="674584461" Received: from aschofie-mobl2.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO aschofie-mobl2) ([10.212.168.201]) by orsmga006-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 May 2023 08:23:12 -0700 Date: Thu, 4 May 2023 08:23:11 -0700 From: Alison Schofield To: "Fabio M. De Francesco" Cc: raghuhack78@gmail.com, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, ira.weiny@intel.com, bwidawsk@kernel.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com, vishal.l.verma@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] cxl/mbox: Remove redundant dev_err() after failed mem alloc Message-ID: References: <20230428012235.119333-1-raghuhack78@gmail.com> <3235466.44csPzL39Z@suse> <2755196.BEx9A2HvPv@suse> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <2755196.BEx9A2HvPv@suse> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 12:46:37PM +0200, Fabio wrote: > On giovedì 4 maggio 2023 00:03:07 CEST Alison Schofield wrote: > > On Wed, May 03, 2023 at 08:32:37PM +0200, Fabio wrote: > > > On venerdì 28 aprile 2023 03:22:34 CEST Raghu H wrote: > > [...] > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Raghu H > > > > > > Is "Raghu H" the name you sign legal documents with? > > > > Fabio, > > Rather than asking a specific question to determine if this is a > > valid SOB, let's just point folks to the documentation to figure > > it out themselves. > > I'm aware that the 'sign legal documents' test > > has been used in the past, but kernel only actually requires a > > known identity. > > > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.17/process/submitting-patches.html#sign-you > > r-work-the-developer-s-certificate-of-origin > > https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/659fd32c86dc/dco-guidelines.md > > Alison, > > Thanks for your suggestions. > > I have just a couple of questions about this issue... > > 1) How do we know that the "real name", which the Linux official documentation > refers to, should be interpreted in accordance to the document pointed by the > second link you provided? > > I mean, how can we be sure that the official documentation should be > interpreted according to the second link, since it doesn't even cite that > document from CNCF? > > Can you provide links to documents / LKML's threads that state agreement of > our Community about the "relaxed" interpretation by CNCF? Citation is hidden it git history. See: d4563201f33a ("Documentation: simplify and clarify DCO contribution example language") > > 2) It looks that some maintainers (e.g., Greg K-H) still interpret "[] using > your real name (sorry, no pseudonyms or anonymous contributions.)" in a > "strict" and "common" sense. See the commit log above. The language was updated to say "using a known identity (sorry, no anonymous contributions.)" > > Can you remember that Greg refused all patches from "Kloudifold" and why? If > not, please take a look at the following two questions / objections from Greg: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-staging/ZCQkPr6t8IOvF6bk@kroah.com/ and > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-staging/ZBCjK2BXhfiFooeO@kroah.com/. The second link above is Greg recognizing that known pseudonyms are allowed. > > It seems that this issue it's not yet settled. > Am I overlooking something? Hey, I'm not meaning to jump on you for asking Raghu the question. I realize you are being helpful to someone who is submitting their first patch. I'm just saying to make the submitter aware of the guideline and put the burden on them to make sure they're using a known identity. Sometimes, what one person thinks of as 'common' is not. Let's refer to the docs and not add out personal or historical layers of interpretation on top of it. (The legal doc signing question may not apply to everyone.) Alison > > Again thanks, > > Fabio > > > > If not, please send a new version signed-off-by your full legal name. > > > Otherwise... sorry for the noise. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Fabio > > >