linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND v1 2/2] riscv: dts: starfive: Add spi node for JH7110 SoC

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:   Tue, 4 Jul 2023 17:41:07 +0100
From:   Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        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 03:13:17PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> 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.

It's probably safe to say that StarFive owns the contributions anyway,
so I doubt adding really makes a difference here.

> > Otherwise, just drop the Co-developed-by.
> 
> It seems separately useful.

Yup, I'd rather have the people there if I ever have to run `git blame`
on whatever commit this becomes.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)