On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 09:22:31AM -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 7:49 AM Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 05:38:27PM -0300, Rodrigo Siqueira wrote: > > > This commit adds a new option for forcing the use of a specific driver > > > indicated via an environment variable. > > > > > > Changes since V1: > > > Petri: > > > - Use an environment variable instead of command line > > > - Refactor the loop in __search_and_open to accept forced module > > > - Don't try to load kernel modules > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Siqueira <rodrigosiqueiramelo@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Note: You can't drop the s-o-b line if your patch contains work by other > > people, like from Petri here. Proper way to resend a patch by someone else > > is to just add a subject prefix of "PATCH RESEND" and otherwise keep > > everything unchanged (including author and everything). > > > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/245532/ > > Last time I was told I have to _add_ my s-o-b nonetheless, even if > just re-sending the patch. > I don't think I should, but in the end I had to change the series, add > and change patches, > so it didn't matter. Communication error here? Rodrigo's resend didn't have my S-o-b, that's what Daniel was pointing at. Removing S-o-b is never ok. Whether it's correct and/or required to add your own S-o-b to resends is another matter. > Maybe we need some clarification on this? > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2018-November/183291.html That was about a kernel patch, and kernel patches are _very_ strict about having to add your S-o-b. -- Petri Latvala _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
