Messages in this thread | | | From | Emil Renner Berthing <> | Date | Tue, 16 Nov 2021 18:01:11 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 00/16] Basic StarFive JH7100 RISC-V SoC support |
| |
On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 at 17:44, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 5:13 PM Andy Shevchenko > <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 6:09 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 4:01 PM Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@esmil.dk> wrote: > > > > Why? > > Submitting Patches tells about chronological order and last SoB to be > > from the submitter. > > These both are correct. Note the difference between 'last SoB' and > > 'SoB to be last [line]'. > > > > Here is the excerpt: > > "Notably, the last Signed-off-by: must always be that of the developer > > submitting the patch." > > I think having the S-o-b in the final line is far more common, and it does > help identify who added the other tags, i.e. the person signing off > immediately below. I don't reject patches that do this the other way round, > but it's something that felt unusual here.
Then I'll stick to what's most common. In any case patch 12 and 16 got it wrong by both conventions.
/Emil
| |