Hello Cameron, On Tue, Dec 26, 2023 at 04:28:39PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Sun, 24 Dec 2023 16:34:46 +0200 > Petre Rodan <petre.rodan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Define enum inside the honeywell,transfer-function property block. > > > > Set the correct irq edge in the example block. > > Based on the datasheet, in table 13 on page 11: > > "End-of-conversion indicator: This pin is set high when a measurement > > and calculation have been completed and the data is ready to be > > clocked out" > > > > Add description on End-of-conversion interrupt. > > > > Signed-off-by: Petre Rodan <petre.rodan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Andreas Klinger <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > What's the relationship between Andreas and this patch? > > Petre seems to have sent it so either Andreas should have a Co-authored-by or > should be the author... Or not there at all Andreas has written this driver as it is in the mainline tree right now and he is marked as a maintainer for it. A month back I told him about the enum off-by-one problem and also about my plan of adding more features to the driver. He was happy to accept my code and once I sent v1 of this patch to the list has asked to work together for the v2 you see here. This has helped with cleaning up the code. He requested the additional 'Signed-off-by' tag, but if you have a more explicit one I will happily use it. 'Co-developed-by' it is. He also owns an i2c version of the sensor so he was able to make sure that the original half of the driver still works after my refactor, hence the 'Tested-by' tag in the last patch. please tell me how do the 'fixes'/feature/improvement tags/keywords look like? are these to be added on the subject line, or should they reside near my 'Signed-off-by' inside the email body? I probably missed the documentation where these are covered :) also, should I add a 'Reviewed-by:' you for 09/10 and 10/10 (the last two patches)? best regards, peter
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
