From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] farsync: Fix confusion about DMA address and buffer offset types Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 23:48:34 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20111220.234834.1265302793309771407.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1324430940.2844.144.camel@deadeye> <1324431172.2844.147.camel@deadeye> <1324431746.2844.161.camel@deadeye> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: ben@decadent.org.uk Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([198.137.202.13]:46761 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752837Ab1LUEsk (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Dec 2011 23:48:40 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1324431746.2844.161.camel@deadeye> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Ben Hutchings Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 01:42:26 +0000 > I accidentally left signing enabled for this one, which I had intended > to disable since you've said that patchwork doesn't deal with > signatures. Except this looks OK on patchwork: > . > > If that also looks OK to you, is there any reason to avoid signing > networking patches? What do you mean exactly by "signing". Do you mean simply the "Signed-off-by: " tag, which you should always add to your own patches, or something else?