pon., 13 cze 2022 o 07:03 Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx> napisał(a): > > On 6/10/22 07:49, Dave Hansen wrote: > > On 6/10/22 04:36, Grzegorz Jaszczyk wrote: > >> czw., 9 cze 2022 o 16:27 Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxx> napisał(a): > >>> On 6/9/22 04:03, Grzegorz Jaszczyk wrote: > >>>> Co-developed-by: Peter Fang <peter.fang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Peter Fang <peter.fang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Co-developed-by: Tomasz Nowicki <tn@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Nowicki <tn@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Zide Chen <zide.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Co-developed-by: Grzegorz Jaszczyk <jaz@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Grzegorz Jaszczyk <jaz@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> --- > >>>> Documentation/virt/kvm/x86/hypercalls.rst | 7 +++++++ > >>>> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 3 +++ > >>>> drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c | 8 ++++++++ > >>>> include/linux/suspend.h | 1 + > >>>> include/uapi/linux/kvm_para.h | 1 + > >>>> kernel/power/suspend.c | 4 ++++ > >>>> 6 files changed, 24 insertions(+) > >>> What's the deal with these emails? > >>> > >>> zide.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >>> > >>> I see a smattering of those in the git logs, but never for Intel folks. > >> I've kept emails as they were in the original patch and I do not think > >> I should change them. This is what Zide and Peter originally used. > > > > "Original patch"? Where did you get this from? > > Is this perhaps coming from Chromium Gerrit? If so, I think you should > include a link to the Gerrit code review discussion. Yes, the original patch comes from chromium gerrit: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromiumos/third_party/kernel/+/3482475/4 and after reworking but before sending to the mailing list, I've asked all involved guys for ack and it was done internally on gerrit: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromiumos/third_party/kernel/+/3666997 > > If it's not a public discussion/patch originally perhaps Suggested-by: > might be a better tag to use. > > > > >>> I'll also say that I'm a bit suspicious of a patch that includes 5 > >>> authors for 24 lines of code. Did it really take five of you to write > >>> 24 lines of code? > >> This patch was built iteratively: original patch comes from Zide and > >> Peter, I've squashed it with Tomasz later changes and reworked by > >> myself for upstream. I didn't want to take credentials from any of the > >> above so ended up with Zide as an author and 3 co-developers. Please > >> let me know if that's an issue. > > > > It just looks awfully fishy. > > > > If it were me, and I'd put enough work into it to believe I deserved > > credit as an *author* (again, of ~13 lines of actual code), I'd probably > > just zap all the other SoB's and mention them in the changelog. I'd > > also explain where the code came from. > > > > Your text above wouldn't be horrible context to add to a cover letter. Actually it may not be an issue for the next version since the suggested by Sean approach is quite different so I would most likely end up with reduced SoB/Co-dev-by in the next version. Best regards, Grzegorz
