On 22/09/2022 02:14, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 09:09:13AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 19/09/2022 23:18, Bjorn Andersson wrote: >>> On Sat, Sep 17, 2022 at 06:03:27PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 16/09/2022 21:00, Bjorn Andersson wrote: >>>>> From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> Add compatibles for the DisplayPort and Embedded DisplayPort blocks in >>>>> Qualcomm SDM845 and SC8280XP platforms. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson <quic_bjorande@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> No need for quicinc SoB (unless you also take ownership). >>>> >>> >>> It's my understanding that both needs to be there. Bjorn @ Linaro >>> authored the patch and the author must certify its origin, but as the >>> submitter I must certify its origin. >> >> It's the same person. There are no two Bjorns (unless there are :) ), so >> you certify with old email. SoB chain is coming from people, not email >> addresses. >> > > IANAL, but I don't think it's the same person. I can't use my old > signature to certify the origin in a contribution today and I can't > claim authorship of something Linaro did. Fine with me. > >> And it is not only my understanding of SoB chain. >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/YuKcBO5JatwRYQJ3@xxxxxxxxx/ >> > > Again, IANAL, but I think the situation is different given AMD and > Xilinx relationship. Hm, I am not sure how it is different. We might know or we might know the change of ownership. Maybe the change of owner came with copyrights, maybe not (someone else bought them). I don't know, there can be many cases here. I interpret Greg's point there as in SoB statement - the person, not email address, certifies. Anyway, this is not a blocker for the patch. Best regards, Krzysztof
