From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christopher Heiny Subject: Re: [PATCH] input synaptics-rmi4: Use put_device() and device_type.release() to free storage. Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 19:17:59 -0800 Message-ID: <52FAE7E7.4090905@synaptics.com> References: <1392160410-8293-1-git-send-email-cheiny@synaptics.com> <20140212015929.GZ1706@sonymobile.com> <52FAD9D5.5070900@synaptics.com> <20140212024940.GA1706@sonymobile.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from us-mx2.synaptics.com ([192.147.44.131]:36680 "EHLO us-mx2.synaptics.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752037AbaBLDSA (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Feb 2014 22:18:00 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20140212024940.GA1706@sonymobile.com> Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: Courtney Cavin Cc: Dmitry Torokhov , Linux Input , Andrew Duggan , Vincent Huang , Vivian Ly , Daniel Rosenberg , Jean Delvare , Joerie de Gram , Linus Walleij , Benjamin Tissoires , David Herrmann , Jiri Kosina On 02/11/2014 06:49 PM, Courtney Cavin wrote: > On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 03:17:57AM +0100, Christopher Heiny wrote: >> On 02/11/2014 05:59 PM, Courtney Cavin wrote: >>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:13:30AM +0100, Christopher Heiny wrote: >>>> For rmi_sensor and rmi_function device_types, use put_device() and >>>> the assocated device_type.release() function to clean up related >>>> structures and storage in the correct and safe order. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Christopher Heiny >>>> Cc: Dmitry Torokhov >>>> Cc: Benjamin Tissoires >>>> Cc: Linux Walleij >>>> Cc: David Herrmann >>>> Cc: Jiri Kosina >>>> Cc: Courtney Cavin >>> >>> I'm not a huge fan of you taking my patches, re-formatting them and >>> sending them as your own. More out of principle then actually caring >>> about ownership. You at least cc'd me on this one.... >> >> Sorry - no slight was intended at all! I wasn't sure what the protocol >> was for picking up an idea from someone else's patch and building on >> that idea, so I just went with the CC. I definitely prefer to attribute >> sources correctly - if you could clarify what should be done (beyond the >> CC) to acknowledge the author of the original patch, I'd appreciate it. > > Sure. In short, follow Documentation/SubmittingPatches , esp. section > 12) Sign your work. > > Generally the patch should read something like the following: > > From: Original Author > > *BLURB* > > Signed-off-by: Original Author > [additional.author@example.org: changed x and y] > Signed-off-by: Additional Author > > Assuming the original author actually signed-off the patch in the first > place, of course. The square bracket part is optional, but can be > helpful for reviewers. > > I'm somewhat surprised that you are not aware of this procedure, as this > is how Dmitry has replied to some of your patches in the past.' Thanks very much. I was actually aware of that, but thought the work was sufficiently different from your original patch that applying your Signed-off-by: to it wouldn't be appropriate (I dislike being signed off on things I don't necessarily agree with as much as lack of attribution). I'll be less paranoid about that in the future.