[Intel-gfx] [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v2] Add support for forcing specific module

[Petri Latvala]

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 09:22:31AM -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 7:49 AM Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 05:38:27PM -0300, Rodrigo Siqueira wrote:
> > > This commit adds a new option for forcing the use of a specific driver
> > > indicated via an environment variable.
> > >
> > > Changes since V1:
> > >  Petri:
> > >  - Use an environment variable instead of command line
> > >  - Refactor the loop in __search_and_open to accept forced module
> > >  - Don't try to load kernel modules
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Siqueira <rodrigosiqueiramelo at gmail.com>
> >
> > Note: You can't drop the s-o-b line if your patch contains work by other
> > people, like from Petri here. Proper way to resend a patch by someone else
> > is to just add a subject prefix of "PATCH RESEND" and otherwise keep
> > everything unchanged (including author and everything).
> >
> > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/245532/
> 
> Last time I was told I have to _add_ my s-o-b nonetheless, even if
> just re-sending the patch.
> I don't think I should, but in the end I had to change the series, add
> and change patches,
> so it didn't matter.


Communication error here? Rodrigo's resend didn't have my S-o-b,
that's what Daniel was pointing at. Removing S-o-b is never
ok. Whether it's correct and/or required to add your own S-o-b to
resends is another matter.


> Maybe we need some clarification on this?
> 
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2018-November/183291.html

That was about a kernel patch, and kernel patches are _very_ strict
about having to add your S-o-b.


-- 
Petri Latvala