On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 11:27:51AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > Simon Horman <simon.horman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 10:01:01AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > >> Simon Horman <simon.horman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> > >> > Correct a typo in the description of interaction between > >> > the TCM and MMU. > >> > > >> > Found by inspection. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Louis Peens <louis.peens@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> Here too I have to ask: what does this signoff chain mean? If two > >> developers were needed for a single-character typo fix, then a > >> Co-developed-by line is appropriate. If you are forwarding a patch from > >> Louis, then a From: line to get the authorship right is indicated ... ? > > > > The patch was created by me. > > > > Due to internal processes a release by a colleague is provided, that is the > > purpose of Louis's sign off (overkill in this case, I agree). > > > > If Louis's sign-off is not necessary from your perspective then I'm happy > > for you to drop it or for my to repost the patch without it. > > So are you perhaps using it like a Reviewed-by? If so, that's the tag > that should be used. But Signed-off-by has a well-defined meaning > described by the DCO, and "release by a colleague" isn't in there, so > I think that tag is not appropriate in this patch. Thanks Jon, I'll post a v2 without the tag in question. Kind regards, Simon
