[PATCH 2/6] spi: atmel: add dmaengine and dt support
plagnioj at jcrosoft.com
Thu Sep 27 04:08:34 EDT 2012
On 09:39 Thu 27 Sep , Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 09:13:13AM +0200, Richard Genoud wrote:
> > 2012/9/26 Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig at pengutronix.de>:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 02:50:57PM +0800, Wenyou Yang wrote:
> > >> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre at atmel.com>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig at pengutronix.de>
> > >
> > > I don't remember ever having touched the spi-atmel driver, so I'm pretty
> > > sure I never gave my S-o-b for anything in this patch. Please reread
> > > Documentation/SubmittingPatches and double check you understood what
> > > Signed-off-by means before resubmitting this patch with all wrong
> > > S-o-b's removed.
> > By the way, what is the correct way to send a patch based on other's work ?
> > If I believe Documentation/SubmittingPatches, only the sender should
> > add his S-o-b.
> > But if you want to give credit to the original author(s), what's the best way ?
> > IMHO, I would CC them, let them add their
> > s-o-b/ack-b/nack-b/whatever-b if they want, and maybe add something
> > like that in the file header :
> > /*
> > * based on the original work of ...
> > */
> > Or in the commit message itself
> > Is that right ?
> Yes. If you only did some trivia like rebasing to a new upstream version you
> can additionally keep the original author as author.
> Documentation/SubmittingPatches has some words about that, too. Grep for
> "lucky at maintainer.example.org" to get the right paragraph.
uasaully when we update a patch we do keeep the author and it's S.o.B and then
explain what we udapte + our own S.O.B
More information about the linux-arm-kernel