[RFC PATCH v2 3/6] ath79: prepare for 1-port TP-Link EAP2x5 devices

Mon Jul 20 13:09:49 EDT 2020

> -----Original Message-----
> From: openwrt-devel [mailto:openwrt-devel-bounces at lists.openwrt.org]
> On Behalf Of Sander Vanheule
> Sent: Montag, 20. Juli 2020 18:28
> To: mail at adrianschmutzler.de
> Cc: ynezz at true.cz; openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org; Julien Dusser
> <julien.dusser at free.fr>
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/6] ath79: prepare for 1-port TP-Link EAP2x5
> devices
> 
> Hi Adrian,
> 
> On Mon, 2020-07-20 at 00:25 +0200, mail at adrianschmutzler.de wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Julien Dusser <julien.dusser at free.fr>
> > > Signed-off-by: Sander Vanheule <sander at svanheule.net>
> >
> > technically, if Julien is first SoB, you should also put him in the
> > author (From:) field.
> 
> The DTSI is derived from Julien's DTS for the EAP245 v1 [1]. By now I've made
> so many modifications, that I don't think Julien should be the person
> responsible for this file any more. But I would still like to credit his work. I'll
> swap the SoB order to reflect this.

Swapping is not such a good idea IMO.
The Series of SoB statements (and possibly Co-developed-by) should essentially give the history of what happened to a patch from top to bottom.

However, in that particular case you are not reusing/updating a patch from Julien, but you are just using something he "invented" for a different purpose. In that context, adding his Signed-off-by is actually wrong if you are strict, unless he has explicit provided it for this subject.

So, for this _separate_ subject - adding a DTSI for 1-port devices - I personally think it should just bear your name. Julien will receive credit for the EAP245 v1 device support.

Same argument goes for similar cases in your patchset I'm currently not aware of:

If the initial patch for the subject at hand is from Julien, he should be author and first SoB.
If you picked up something he did and applied it to a different purpose, you are the author. You may mentioned him in the commit message text then (if necessary, for the DTSI I wouldn't even consider that necessary).

Best

Adrian

> 
> [1] https://github.com/j-d-
> r/openwrt/blob/ae7dc9bf871cd9f27ccc1f4bff335ab5e79bcae9/target/linux/a
> th79/dts/qca9563_tplink_eap245-v1.dts
> 
> 
> > > ---
> > >  .../dts/qca9563_tplink_eap2x5_1port.dtsi      | 139
> > > ++++++++++++++++++
> > >  target/linux/ath79/image/generic-tp-link.mk   |  10 ++
> > >  2 files changed, 149 insertions(+)
> > >  create mode 100644
> > > target/linux/ath79/dts/qca9563_tplink_eap2x5_1port.dtsi
> > >
> > > diff --git
> > > a/target/linux/ath79/dts/qca9563_tplink_eap2x5_1port.dtsi
> > > b/target/linux/ath79/dts/qca9563_tplink_eap2x5_1port.dtsi
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 0000000000..24f0b4f0ce
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/target/linux/ath79/dts/qca9563_tplink_eap2x5_1port.dtsi
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,139 @@
> > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later OR MIT #include
> >
> > Not really important, but I'd prefer an empty line after the license.
> > (Broken in my mail anyway, but I looked at it in patchwork.)
> 
> Fixed.
> 
> 
> > > +&pinmux {
> > > +	mdio_pins: pinux_mdio_pins {
> >
> > Typo for the node name (pinux). Despite, including pinmux for the node
> > name actually doesn't make much sense, as it's part of &pinmux anyway.
> > If you want it, it would make sense to add it to the DT label, as this
> > one is actually used in global context.
> >
> > I'd be fine with "mdio_pins: mdio_pins" as well, though, as "pins"
> > already tells whats going on.
> 
> I went with your suggestion and changed it to "mdio_pins: mdio_pins".
> 
> 
> > > +		/* GPIO 8 as MDC(0x21), GPIO 10 as MDIO(0x20) */
> > > +		pinctrl-single,bits = <0x8 0x00000021 0x000000ff>,
> > > +				      <0x8 0x00200000 0x00ff0000>;
> >
> > Err, is there a specific reason why you don't use:
> >
> > pinctrl-single,bits = <0x8 0x00200021 0x00ff00ff>;
> >
> > Or is the second offset supposed to 0xc or something?
> 
> The lines are correct and entirely as intended. But I just didn't think about
> merging the two lines... *facepalm* Merged, and swapped the order in the
> comment to 10/8 to have the same order as in the specified bits.
> 
> 
> > > diff --git a/target/linux/ath79/image/generic-tp-link.mk
> > > b/target/linux/ath79/image/generic-tp-link.mk
> > > index 8a26e4bebe..d2cc8d09bd 100644
> > > --- a/target/linux/ath79/image/generic-tp-link.mk
> > > +++ b/target/linux/ath79/image/generic-tp-link.mk
> > > @@ -362,6 +362,16 @@ define Device/tplink_cpe610-v2  endef
> > > TARGET_DEVICES += tplink_cpe610-v2
> > >
> > > +define Device/tplink_eap2x5_1port
> > > +  $(Device/tplink-safeloader)
> > > +  SOC := qca9563
> > > +  IMAGE_SIZE := 15104k
> > > +  LOADER_TYPE := elf
> > > +  KERNEL := kernel-bin | append-dtb | lzma | loader-kernel
> > > +  KERNEL_INITRAMFS := $$(KERNEL)
> > > +  IMAGE/factory.bin := append-rootfs | tplink-safeloader factory |
> > > +pad-extra 128 endef
> > > +
> > >  define Device/tplink_eap245-v3
> >
> > This packaging of patches into different projects really makes it hard
> > to review.
> >
> > But anyway, limiting the device definition to 1port doesn't make much
> > sense conceptually (in contrast to the DTS, were it is useful).
> >
> > I'd go for tplink_eap2x5 here and already use it for the eap245-v3 in
> > this patch.
> >
> > Only IMAGE_SIZE would need to be moved to the devices then, and that's
> > better anyway.
> >
> 
> Sorry for making this harder than it should be. I didn't want to duplicate the
> patches already on GitHub, and is one of the reasons I submitted this to the
> list as an RFC, without the complete patch set.
> 
> If it's okay for you (and ynezz) I will add these patches to the EAP245
> v3 pull request for the review (and change the topic and cover letter
> accordingly, merge the duplicated makefile code).
> 
> Best,
> Sander
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openwrt-devel mailing list
> openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: openpgp-digital-signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 834 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openwrt.org/pipermail/openwrt-devel/attachments/20200720/5c89f1c1/attachment.sig>