[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <712691085.1137.1551729467392.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2019 14:57:47 -0500 (EST)
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
paulmck <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, shuah <shuah@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kselftest <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftest/rseq: Remove duplicate header
----- On Mar 4, 2019, at 1:53 PM, Souptick Joarder jrdr.linux@...il.com wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 12:20 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 12:08:27AM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote:
>> > Remove duplicate header which is included twice
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Sabyasachi Gupta <sabyasachi.linux@...il.com>
>> > Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com>
>>
>> That SoB chain is invalid.
>
> I didn't get why it is invalid ?
I think it's about having the author of the patch (From) as first
Signed-off-by, and then apply following Signed-off-by by maintainers
who pick up the patch. (That's what I am used to see)
What is the intent behind the second Signed-off-by by Sabyasachi Gupta ?
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists