[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <41c905da-ae3e-4acb-bbfa-d33d3306824d@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2023 15:13:17 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc: William Qiu <william.qiu@...rfivetech.com>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@...il.dk>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND v1 2/2] riscv: dts: starfive: Add spi node for JH7110 SoC
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 03:21:30PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 04/07/2023 15:16, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 02:27:57PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> Also see:
> >> "every Co-developed-by: must be immediately
> >> followed by a Signed-off-by: of the associated co-author."
> >> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.4/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L467
> > Oh, that seems unhelpful especially with it not lining up with the DCO.
> I assume the intention was here that if I attribute some co-author with
> Co-developed-by, then I know that author, therefore I expect author to
> explicitly participate in DCO chain.
Why? They're not the one sending the patch out, nor are they relying on
someone else having certified anything.
> Otherwise, just drop the Co-developed-by.
It seems separately useful.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists