On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 3:37 PM BALATON Zoltan <bala...@eik.bme.hu> wrote:
> On Thu, 9 May 2024, Cord Amfmgm wrote: > > On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 12:48 PM Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> > > wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 8 May 2024 at 16:29, Cord Amfmgm <dmamf...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 3:45 AM Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Your Signed-off-by line does not match the From: line ... could you > >> please > >>>> fix this? (see > >>>> > >> > https://www.qemu.org/docs/master/devel/submitting-a-patch.html#patch-emails-must-include-a-signed-off-by-line > >>>> , too) > >>> > >>> > >>> I'll submit the new patch request with my pseudonym in the From: and > >> Signed-off-by: lines, per your request. Doesn't matter to me. However, > this > >> arises simply because I don't give gmail my real name - > >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nymwars > >> > >> I'm confused now. Of the two names you've used in this > >> patch (Cord Amfmgm and David Hubbard), are they both > >> pseudonyms, or is one a pseudonym and one your real name? > >> > >> > > Hi Peter, > > > > I am attempting to submit a small patch. For context, I'm getting broader > > attention now because apparently OHCI is one of the less used components > of > > qemu and maybe the review process was taking a while. That's relevant > > because I wasn't able to get prompt feedback and am now choosing what > > appears to be the most expeditious approach -- all I want is to get this > > patch done and be out of your hair. If Thomas Huth wants me to use a > > consistent name, have I not complied? Are you asking out of curiosity or > is > > there a valid reason why I should answer your question in order to get > the > > patch submitted? Would you like to have a friendly chat over virtual > coffee > > sometime (but off-list)? > > See here: > > https://www.qemu.org/docs/master/devel/submitting-a-patch.html#patch-emails-must-include-a-signed-off-by-line > and also the document linked from there: > > http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/SubmittingPatches?id=f6f94e2ab1b33f0082ac22d71f66385a60d8157f#n297 Yeah the policy makes sense. So it sounds like we're all good for that. > > > As for getting the patch reviewed, it may be difficult as the USB > maintainer is practically absent and has no time for QEMU for a while and > as OHCI as you said is not odten used there aren't many people who could > review it. Getting at least the formal stuff out of the way may help > though to get somebody to try to review the patch. > > Regards, > BALATON Zoltan I understand. Well, that's unfortunate that the patch is going back on the backlog. I'll leave it alone then? There's always the option if anyone has an old enough system that the EHCI on it has an actual OHCI companion controller, then they can use actual hardware to validate the behavior. Barring some message saying the patch has been approved or that someone wants me to rework the patch, I'll leave this as abandoned.
