linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 05/11] dt-bindings: pwm: add microchip corepwm binding

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:   Wed, 23 Feb 2022 08:55:10 +0000
From:   <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
To:     <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
        <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
CC:     <a.zummo@...ertech.it>, <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, <atishp@...osinc.com>, <brgl@...ev.pl>,
        <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>, <daire.mcnamara@...rochip.com>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        <ivan.griffin@...rochip.com>, <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>,
        <lee.jones@...aro.org>, <lewis.hanly@...rochip.com>,
        <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org>,
        <palmer@...belt.com>, <palmer@...osinc.com>,
        <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        <robh@...nel.org>, <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 05/11] dt-bindings: pwm: add microchip corepwm binding

On 23/02/2022 08:20, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 08:12:49AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 23/02/2022 07:20, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 01:58:35PM +0000, conor.dooley@...rochip.com wrote:
> > >> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
> > >>
> > >> Add device tree bindings for the Microchip fpga fabric based "core" PWM
> > >> controller.
> > >>
> > >> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
> > >> Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...osinc.com>
> > > 
> > > I like it:
> > > 
> > > Acked-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
> > > 
> > > nitpick: Put your S-o-b last in the commit log. (This doesn't justify a
> > > resend IMHO)
> > 
> > It should be the opposite - the first. First author signs the patch,
> > then comes review and finally an ack. Putting SoB at then suggests that
> > tags were accumulated before sending patch, out of mailing list.
> 
> well, or in an earlier revision of this patch as is the case here. One
> of the ideas of S-o-b is that the order shows the flow of the patch
> states and if this patch ends in git with:
> 
> 	Referred-by: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
> 	Singed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
> 	Backed-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...osinc.com>
> 	Singed-off-by: Peter Maintainer <pm@...mple.com>
> 
> I'd expect that Backed-by was added by Peter, not Conor.
> (Modified the tags on purpose to not interfere with b4's tag pickup, I
> guess you humans still get the point.)

I had put the acks after the S-o-B for patches I hadn't changed since the ack,
but I think that may have been a misinterpretation of what was meant by Rob
when he said tags should be in chronological order. Won't do it this way in
the future.

If the remaining patch gets a maintainer ack, the order will be fine I guess
since it'll be Palmer taking it anyway. If there's a v8, I will fix the order.

Thanks,
Conor