On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 03:52:48PM +0000, Salil Mehta wrote: > > From: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2023 1:07 PM > > To: Salil Mehta <salil.me...@huawei.com> > > Cc: xianglai li <lixiang...@loongson.cn>; qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Bernhard > > Beschow <shen...@gmail.com>; Salil Mehta <salil.me...@opnsrc.net>; Xiaojuan > > Yang <yangxiaoj...@loongson.cn>; Song Gao <gaos...@loongson.cn>; Igor > > Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com>; Ani Sinha <anisi...@redhat.com>; Paolo > > Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>; Richard Henderson > > <richard.hender...@linaro.org>; Eduardo Habkost <edua...@habkost.net>; > > Marcel Apfelbaum <marcel.apfelb...@gmail.com>; Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > > <phi...@linaro.org>; wangyanan (Y) <wangyana...@huawei.com>; Daniel P. > > Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com>; Peter Xu <pet...@redhat.com>; David > > Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com>; Bibo Mao <maob...@loongson.cn> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/7] Update CPUs AML with cpu-(ctrl)dev change > > > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 12:03:46PM +0000, Salil Mehta wrote: > > > Sure, ARM patch-set follows exactly above rules. > > > > > > > > > Almost. > > > > Co-developed-by: Salil Mehta <salil.me...@huawei.com> > > Signed-off-by: Salil Mehta <salil.me...@huawei.com> > > Co-developed-by: Keqian Zhu <zhukeqi...@huawei.com> > > Signed-off-by: Keqian Zhu <zhukeqi...@huawei.com> > > Signed-off-by: Salil Mehta <salil.me...@huawei.com> > > > > You should drop your own Co-developed-by as well as multiple Signed-off-by. > > > https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html#when-to-use-acked-by-cc-and-co-developed-by > > Reference: Co-developed-by: Pasting excerpt from above link: > > "1. Standard sign-off procedure applies, i.e. the ordering of > Signed-off-by: tags should reflect the chronological history > of the patch insofar as possible, regardless of whether the > author is attributed via From: or Co-developed-by:. > 2.Notably, the last Signed-off-by: must always be that of the > developer submitting the patch." > > To be able to achieve 1. I have to put Co-developed-by: of > mine at the top as I am the main author of the patch-set > historically and have been continually driving the work. > (It is a common rule even within the kernel to keep first > SOB that of the main author)
yes that is fine. > Reference: Signed-off-by: Excerpt from above link: > > " Any further SoBs (Signed-off-by:'s) following the author's > SoB are from people handling and transporting the patch, but > were not involved in its development. SoB chains should > reflect the real route a patch took as it was propagated to > the maintainers and ultimately to Linus, with the first SoB > entry signalling primary authorship of a single author." > > > And since I am the person who is submitting the patches > (which might or not be the same in future) I need to put > my SOB in any case to be able to achieve 2. > > This is to ensure primary author remains the first SOD/CDY. > > > Thanks > Salil. I think you misunderstand what it says - you don't need to repeat signatures many times. you took the patches that were signed off by people A,B,C and sent to me. Thus you do: S.o.b: A S.o.b: B S.o.b: C S.o.b: Salil Mehta and I add: Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> and send to Linus. -- MST`
