Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Mon, 26 Mar 2012 15:47:08 -0700 | | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4] x86, olpc: add debugfs interface for EC commands |
| |
On 03/26/2012 03:45 PM, Daniel Drake wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Andrew Morton > <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote: >> s/fix/break/? "Originally-from" is not a recognised tag. If this code >> is based upon an earlier version from Paul then Signed-off-by: is >> correct. >> >> What's going on here? What are you trying to communicate? > > I'm trying to take Ingo's suggestion, in the thread "[patch 1/8] x86, > olpc: add debugfs interface for EC commands" he wrote: > > ==== > This is not a valid signoff sequence - the 'From: ' author of > the patch must be the first SOB line. > > The way to do this is either to have a: > > From: Paul Fox <pgf@laptop.org> > > or to covert Paul Fox's SOB to a credit line, such as: > > Originally-from: Paul Fox <pgf@laptop.org> > ==== > > The original code was from Paul Fox. I changed it somewhat > significantly, and Paul approves of the end result. > Can someone suggest a way of expressing this, including tag ordering, > that will be accepted by all parties? :) >
My recommendation is:
Originally-by: Paul Fox <pgf@laptop.org>
... followed by Signed-off-by: in the order of patch flow. Approving a patch, when not passing through, is indicated by Acked-by: or Reviewed-by:
-hpa
|  |