Hi, On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 07:19:58PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > Hi all, > > On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 05:42:13PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 02:28:50PM +0200, Sergio.Gelato@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 01:54:35PM +0200, Steve Dickson wrote: > > > > It did because it was not in the appropriate format... The patch > > > > was an attachment, not in-line, no Signed-off-by: line and > > > > the patch was not create by git format-patch command (which > > > > adds PATCH in the subject line). > > > > > > I see no mention of formatting requirements at > > > https://www.linux-nfs.org/wiki/index.php/Reporting_bugs > > > (not even by reference to the Linux kernel tree). > > > > Thank you all for looking into it. Steve, do you need to have it > > re-submitted in a git format-patch format? At least a Signed-off-by > > line by Sergio would be needed in my understanding. > > I guess otherwise we can use soemthing like the following though a > Signed-off-by is probably not right here, or is it enough if I say > Reported-by: and Patch-originally-by: although the later is not an > official kernel doc mentioned tag? And then one seems to be able to do so many mistakes around one patch. Here is an improved version (v2), fixing a typo in the Link reference and using a Closes: tag after the Reported-by: This now should be better than the previous one. Regards, Salvatore
