From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 17:48:42 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] Renesas Ethernet AVB driver Message-Id: <20150331.134842.499356389024178984.davem@davemloft.net> List-Id: References: <20150331064349.GB4605@localhost.localdomain> <20150331.113832.2042398685489897677.davem@davemloft.net> <551ADC12.5050603@cogentembedded.com> In-Reply-To: <551ADC12.5050603@cogentembedded.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com Cc: richardcochran@gmail.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, pawel.moll@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, galak@codeaurora.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, mitsuhiro.kimura.kc@renesas.com, masaru.nagai.vx@renesas.com From: Sergei Shtylyov Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 20:40:34 +0300 > We (Cogent Embedded) are authorized to do this, isn't this enough? Maybe, maybe not, but I think my request is absolutely legitimate. >>> [adding davem on CC] > >>> Dave, is that correct? > >> I refuse to apply any patch without an appropriate signoff. > > But what do you mean by "appropriate signoff"? I have provided mine > but Richard insists there should be sign-offs from the primary driver > authors -- it's the first time I'm encountering such a requirement. Is there a serious problem getting the original authors to signoff on this driver submission? If so, why? This should be very straightforward, and if for some reason these authors are unwilling to then I have every reason to be concerned about this. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] Renesas Ethernet AVB driver Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 13:48:42 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <20150331.134842.499356389024178984.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20150331064349.GB4605@localhost.localdomain> <20150331.113832.2042398685489897677.davem@davemloft.net> <551ADC12.5050603@cogentembedded.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: richardcochran@gmail.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, pawel.moll@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, galak@codeaurora.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, mitsuhiro.kimura.kc@renesas.com, masaru.nagai.vx@renesas.com To: sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com Return-path: In-Reply-To: <551ADC12.5050603@cogentembedded.com> Sender: linux-sh-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org From: Sergei Shtylyov Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 20:40:34 +0300 > We (Cogent Embedded) are authorized to do this, isn't this enough? Maybe, maybe not, but I think my request is absolutely legitimate. >>> [adding davem on CC] > >>> Dave, is that correct? > >> I refuse to apply any patch without an appropriate signoff. > > But what do you mean by "appropriate signoff"? I have provided mine > but Richard insists there should be sign-offs from the primary driver > authors -- it's the first time I'm encountering such a requirement. Is there a serious problem getting the original authors to signoff on this driver submission? If so, why? This should be very straightforward, and if for some reason these authors are unwilling to then I have every reason to be concerned about this.