On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 02:53:44PM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote: > Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > >> All packets in a bundle should use the same endpoint id as the > >> first lookahead. > >> > >> This matches how things are done is ath6kl, however, > >> this patch can theoretically handle several bundles > >> in ath10k_sdio_mbox_rx_process_packets(). > >> > >> Without this patch we get lots of errors about invalid endpoint id: > >> > >> ath10k_sdio mmc2:0001:1: invalid endpoint in look-ahead: 224 > >> ath10k_sdio mmc2:0001:1: failed to get pending recv messages: -12 > >> ath10k_sdio mmc2:0001:1: failed to process pending SDIO interrupts: -12 > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Alagu Sankar <alagusankar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > You have Alagu's s-o-b first so that implies Alagu is the author. So > > should I add From header for Alagu and add you (Niklas) as > > Co-Developed-by? Or vice versa? Hello Kalle, It is not always obvious how the combination of git-author and Co-Developed-by should be: http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1801.2/00988.html Alagu deserves most credit, since I have simply taken parts of a very big patch and split it into smaller pieces. I tried to do the right thing by having his Signed-off-by first. Let's go with your suggestion and add a From: header with Alagu's email, and a Co-Developed-by tag with my email. (Note that both Signed-off-bys are still needed according to submitting-patches.rst) Do you want me to resend the patches with these two lines added, or can you fix them up manually? Regards, Niklas > > Ah, the same issue is with all three patches. So whatever we decide, > I'll do the same changes on all three. > > -- > Kalle Valo
