Re: [PATCH v2] USB: serial: pl2303: Add IBM device IDs

[Johan Hovold]

On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 09:46:05AM +0000, Joel Stanley wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 09:44, Johan Hovold <johan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 09:24:51AM +0000, Joel Stanley wrote:
> > > On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 09:15, Johan Hovold <johan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 08:52:29AM +0000, Joel Stanley wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 08:25, Johan Hovold <johan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 04:44:46PM -0600, Eddie James wrote:
> > > > > > > IBM manufactures a PL2303 device for UPS communications. Add the vendor
> > > > > > > and product IDs so that the PL2303 driver binds to the device.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Joel Stanley <joel@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eddie James <eajames@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > Changes since v1:
> > > > > > >  - Fix commit message Signed-off-by ordering.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Almost there. You're still missing a Co-developed-by tag, a From line,
> > > > > > or both.
> > > > >
> > > > > It's neither. This patch was applied to a tree by myself, and I asked
> > > > > Eddie to send it to mainline for merging.
> > > >
> > > > Then you are missing a From line. As the patch looks like know, Eddie is
> > > > considered the author and not you.
> > >
> > > You are incorrect. Eddie is the author.
> >
> > Then what is your SoB doing there in the first place? If Eddie is the
> > sole author as well as the submitter, and you didn't touch the patch in
> > between, then your SoB does not belong in the chain.
> >
> > If you applied Eddie's patch to your shared tree and Eddie generated a
> > patch from there, then the chain should be:
> >
> >         SoB: E
> >         SoB: J
> >         SoB: E
> >
> > but this is starting to look a bit ridiculous.
> 
> I agree. I would appreciate it if you applied the patch, with or
> without my sob in whatever order you deem fit.

Ok, I'll assume what you intended was E-J-E but that perhaps
git-format-patch swallowed the last SoB. Thanks for clarifying.

I was going to apply to the patch, but I see now that you didn't provide
any details about the product apart from it being a UPS and that's not
reflected in the define name.

Do you have a pointer to device (family) in question?

Johan