From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-f180.google.com (mail-wi0-f180.google.com [209.85.212.180]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4065D8042 for ; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 07:12:27 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wi0-f180.google.com with SMTP id n3so546988wiv.7 for ; Mon, 08 Dec 2014 22:12:27 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization :user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:content-type; bh=1ccaSsAQhbU0a64dY6gve+ikFd8jeHhzJP1UkpfVlR0=; b=QQHbZRJ+5RDSuerIeTNpuLBVzxpX5WW+VbsLk5vkePf89uy9Ap/4tP/B+su/vCwwz8 wAsGiv4wr3igasRST7aPYKsDkNFEDIGpzXOkgoZ7efuENnFKcA3+jcKOrvChzMkZ3DSE KV4YfqHnRPZCa1MbI5mcB1BO4kwN5rKMHIYlooQr6SmjnmE3/bXBET/mCL4U7nImLDyN UTVMRU98WiRhucUuvc/EpB8r8gjF+Fwwqt52bj1ZH3iaroTVAYJdVUHFsI369OPal0Vh q3T5eU7rk5qcdq3LEQqNqy2k+VpRlyH3tOc2Eq1czdOENkhC3mCX9Rx0JBdGyq+qFxSm 3SBw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmJyRxMgVVJaXtgI9uiq4W6JqnSYUKvxo5zwhPjCCyNjswLav4dcIE4nENtW9ovisbmJIGD X-Received: by 10.180.103.6 with SMTP id fs6mr28702203wib.11.1418105547100; Mon, 08 Dec 2014 22:12:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from xps13.localnet ([88.249.222.12]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id iz19sm12423893wic.8.2014.12.08.22.12.25 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 08 Dec 2014 22:12:26 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Ouyang, Changchun" Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 07:11:59 +0100 Message-ID: <1941671.RlrZxTondI@xps13> Organization: 6WIND User-Agent: KMail/4.14.3 (Linux/3.17.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.3; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <1418019716-4962-1-git-send-email-changchun.ouyang@intel.com> <533710CFB86FA344BFBF2D6802E60286C9DE44@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio implementation X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 06:12:27 -0000 2014-12-09 05:41, Ouyang, Changchun: > Hi > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Qiu, Michael > > Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2014 11:23 AM > > To: Ouyang, Changchun; Thomas Monjalon; Stephen Hemminger > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio implementation > > > > On 12/9/2014 9:11 AM, Ouyang, Changchun wrote: > > > Hi Thomas, > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > >> Sent: Monday, December 8, 2014 5:31 PM > > >> To: Ouyang, Changchun > > >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org > > >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/17] Single virtio > > >> implementation > > >> > > >> Hi Changchun, > > >> > > >> 2014-12-08 14:21, Ouyang Changchun: > > >>> This patch set bases on two original RFC patch sets from Stephen > > >> Hemminger[stephen@networkplumber.org] > > >>> Refer to [http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-August/004845.html ] > > >>> for > > >> the original one. > > >>> This patch set also resolves some conflict with latest codes and > > >>> removed > > >> duplicated codes. > > >> > > >> As you sent the patches, you appear as the author. > > >> But I guess Stephen should be the author for some of them. > > >> Please check who has contributed the most in each patch to decide. > > > You are right, most of patches originate from Stephen's patchset, > > > except for the last one, To be honest, I am ok whoever is the author > > > of this patch set, :-), We could co-own the feature of Single virtio > > > if you all agree with it, and I think we couldn't finish Such a > > > feature without collaboration among us, this is why I tried to communicate > > with most of you to collect more feedback, suggestion and comments for this > > feature. > > > Very appreciate for all kinds of feedback, suggestion here, especially for > > patch set from Stephen. > > > > > > According to your request, how could we make this patch set looks more > > like Stephen as the author? > > > Currently I add Stephen as Signed-off-by list in each patch(I got the > > agreement from Stephen before doing this :-)). > > > > Hi Ouyang, > > > > "Signed-off-by" should be added by himself, because the one who in the > > Signed-off-by list should take responsibility for it(like potential bugs/issues). > > > > Although, lots of patches are originate from Stephen, we still need himself > > add this line :) > > Hi Thomas, > It that right? I can't add Stephen into Signed-off-by list even if I have gotten the agreement from Stephen, > What 's the strict rule here? Stephen sent the patches with his Signed-off, then you added yours. This is OK. Using git am, author would have been Stephen. To change author now, you can edit each commit with interactive rebase and "git commit --amend --author=Stephen". No need to resend now. Please check it for next version of the patchset. -- Thomas