linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 08/10] clk: qcom: Add graphics clock controller driver for SM8250

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:   Thu, 28 May 2020 18:11:27 -0700
From:   Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
To:     Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     Jonathan Marek <jonathan@...ek.ca>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm-owner@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/10] clk: qcom: Add graphics clock controller driver
 for SM8250

On Mon 25 May 02:47 PDT 2020, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:

> Hi Jonathan,
> 
> On 2020-05-25 02:36, Jonathan Marek wrote:
> > Add support for the graphics clock controller found on SM8250
> > based devices. This would allow graphics drivers to probe and
> > control their clocks.
> > 
> > This is copied from the downstream kernel, adapted for upstream.
> > For example, GDSCs have been added.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Marek <jonathan@...ek.ca>
> 
> Since this is taken from downstream, maintain the original author's
> signed-off and add yourself as the co-developer if you have done
> any modifications. Same applies to all other patches.
> 

I disagree with this.

As expressed in the commit message, this patch is based on the
downstream driver, not the individual patch.  As such, the _patch_ is
prepared by Jonathan and by his Signed-off-by certifies the origin of
the contribution per section 11.a or 11.b of submitting-patches.rst.

Regarding co-developed-by; this should not be used when "forwarding" an
existing patch. Per section 11.c the contributor should add their
Signed-off-by to certify the origin of the patch. Any modifications
should be documented in immediately proceeding the s-o-b, as described
later in section 11.

Thanks,
Bjorn