linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: iio: ad5933: add binding doc for ad5933

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 3 Dec 2018 00:20:44 +0530
From:   Himanshu Jha <himanshujha199640@...il.com>
To:     Marcelo Schmitt <marcelo.schmitt1@...il.com>, joe@...ches.com
Cc:     lars@...afoo.de, Michael.Hennerich@...log.com, jic23@...nel.org,
        knaack.h@....de, pmeerw@...erw.net, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-usp@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: iio: ad5933: add binding doc for ad5933

On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 02:57:12PM -0200, Marcelo Schmitt wrote:
> Add a devicetree documentation for the ad5933 and ad5934 impedance
> converter, network analyzer.
> 
> Co-Developed-by: Gabriel Capella <gabriel@...ella.pro>

checkpatch spits out:

WARNING: Non-standard signature: Co-Developed-by:

Co-developed-by Vs Co-Developed-by ?

Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst: - Co-developed-by: states that the patch was also created by another developer
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:12) When to use Acked-by:, Cc:, and Co-Developed-by:

Confusing! Don't know which one is correct.

> Signed-off-by: Marcelo Schmitt <marcelo.schmitt1@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Gabriel Capella <gabriel@...ella.pro>
> ---

Use `./scripts/get_maintainer.pl <your_patch>` to list the DT
maintainers and the relevant mailing list.

-- 
Himanshu Jha
Undergraduate Student
Department of Electronics & Communication
Guru Tegh Bahadur Institute of Technology